Thread: Why is the Immigration Problem so Difficult

gina - 10/22/2018 at 05:34 PM


"The architects of the family separation approach have been hard at work on alternatives, according to people briefed on the group’s efforts. Their goal is to announce a plan before the November elections that can withstand the legal challenges that crippled the administration’s previous attempts.

The group’s charge from the White House is simple and explicit: Replace what the administration describes as “catch and release,” the practice of releasing immigrants from detention while they wait for court hearings.

The most talked-about alternative would be a variation of the family separation policy. Parents would be forced to choose between voluntarily relinquishing their children to foster care or remaining imprisoned together as a family. The latter option would require parents to waive their child’s right to be released from detention within 20 days.

The goal of this option, known as “binary choice,” would be to “maximize deterrence and consequences for families,” according to a person familiar with the agenda for one of the officials’ meetings.

Another idea on the table is to speed up the legal cases of migrant families and process them on a first-in, first-out basis, in hopes that word would get back to Central America that border crossers were being swiftly deported.

The working group is also considering strengthening the standard of proof on asylum cases, a standard that has already risen under President Trump, in order to screen out more families during the first stage of the process, known as the “credible fear” interview. The final two ideas being discussed are extending the use of GPS ankle monitors, and immediately arresting anyone who receives a deportation order to ensure that they leave the country."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/trump%E2%80%99s-plans-to-deter-migrants-c ould-mean-new-%E2%80%98voluntary%E2%80%99-family-separations/ar-BBOIyxB?li= BBnbfcL


Remarks: Other countries weaponize their borders, if you come over illegally, you get shot.

Too harsh? Put them on busses and send them back to Mexico. Let Mexico deal with it.

We do not have to waste time on courts, and Constitutional rights because they are not citizens, they really do not have any rights coming in illegally. Separating families is cruel and inhumane, send them home as a family. The most we should do is provide them with a couple of meals, and if they do not have appropriate clothing, like a coat and the weather is cold, maybe a coat and blanket.

Why is the issue so difficult? They come illegally, they are sent back from where they came from. No torture, no prison, just send them back.




LeglizHemp - 10/22/2018 at 09:45 PM

I will say that i have a problem with this latest caravan of immigrants. I don't know why, maybe because of the size of it?
I also don't agree with cutting off aid to the countries they are coming from.
I'm a little confused by the situation.
I understand people all over the world face horrific conditions.
I understand if they reach our border they should be treated fairly.
I don't understand how our neighbors to the south can allow this group of refugees to pass through their country to ours.

I hate to say it but maybe Mexico should take them.


BIGV - 10/22/2018 at 09:57 PM

quote:
I hate to say it but maybe Mexico should take them.


Whimsical to say the least


pops42 - 10/22/2018 at 10:25 PM

quote:
quote:
I hate to say it but maybe Mexico should take them.


Whimsical to say the least
Why should mexico take them?, they are mostly from central america?. trump hasn't secured the border like he said he would, has he?.


LeglizHemp - 10/22/2018 at 10:43 PM

I suppose a caravan like this reeks of a feeling of "i deserve to come to the USA", not move to brazil or argentina or peru.

Like i need my life to be not 100% better but 1000%

Sorry, but just the way it seems.

Shoot for the Stars I guess

[Edited on 10/22/2018 by LeglizHemp]


BIGV - 10/22/2018 at 10:59 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I hate to say it but maybe Mexico should take them.


Whimsical to say the least
Why should mexico take them?, they are mostly from central america?. trump hasn't secured the border like he said he would, has he?.


Why shouldn't Mexico step up and help people in need?

Why should this burden fall to the taxpayers of this Republic?

Why are not the nations these people are fleeing be held responsible?




MartinD28 - 10/22/2018 at 11:07 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I hate to say it but maybe Mexico should take them.


Whimsical to say the least
Why should mexico take them?, they are mostly from central america?. trump hasn't secured the border like he said he would, has he?.


When Trump follows through with his campaign promise for Mexico to pay for the wall, and when pigs like Trump fly is when Trump will secure the border.




BIGV - 10/22/2018 at 11:16 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I hate to say it but maybe Mexico should take them.


Whimsical to say the least
Why should mexico take them?, they are mostly from central america?. trump hasn't secured the border like he said he would, has he?.


When Trump follows through with his campaign promise for Mexico to pay for the wall, and when pigs like Trump fly is when Trump will secure the border.


So, with this "caravan" on the way, the Wall would be a Good idea?

What do you propose our response at the border should be if they arrive and demonstrate, demanding entry?


LeglizHemp - 10/22/2018 at 11:21 PM

I'm not sure. I do not want a wall. I do not want families to be separated.


BIGV - 10/22/2018 at 11:22 PM

quote:
I'm not sure. I do not want a wall. I do not want families to be separated.


When do you say "enough is enough"?


LeglizHemp - 10/22/2018 at 11:33 PM

Hmmmm, not yet? I mean it's troubling?
But, i do not want a wall and i do not want families sepparated.
I do want DACA.
I do want a path to citizenship (for those who have bčen here)
Yet i am leary of groups in a caravan, with sole purpose, after all the border troubles, with main purpose of breaking US immigration law.

I guess?


BIGV - 10/22/2018 at 11:36 PM

quote:
Hmmmm, not yet? I mean it's troubling?
But, i do not want a wall and i do not want families sepparated.
I do want DACA.
I do want a path to citizenship (for those who have bčen here)
Yet i am leary of groups in a caravan, with sole purpose, after all the border troubles, with main purpose of breaking US immigration law.

I guess?


So, if this materializes, do we let them in?

What if Trump calls on the National Guard to protect the Border?

Are we gonna hear people scream about cruelty?


LeglizHemp - 10/22/2018 at 11:45 PM

Yes


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 12:22 AM

quote:
Yes


Haha, fair enough. No easy decisions here.


MartinD28 - 10/23/2018 at 12:22 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I hate to say it but maybe Mexico should take them.


Whimsical to say the least
Why should mexico take them?, they are mostly from central america?. trump hasn't secured the border like he said he would, has he?.


When Trump follows through with his campaign promise for Mexico to pay for the wall, and when pigs like Trump fly is when Trump will secure the border.


So, with this "caravan" on the way, the Wall would be a Good idea?

What do you propose our response at the border should be if they arrive and demonstrate, demanding entry?


Enforcement of laws on the books is a good start. Immigration reform is a next step.

How do you propose paying for the wall? Should your tax dollars pay for it? Are you good with that? Do you hold Trump accountable to his campaign promises or just give him a pass?

We are a county that is a melting pot. This is what made our country what it is. Even Trump's wives (plural) came from foreign countries.

"President Trump has long railed against “chain migration” and continues to threaten to end family-preference immigration visas, despite the fact that his in-laws Viktor and Amalija Knavs were granted U.S. citizenship through the first lady’s sponsorship." Would that make Trump a hypocrite? What's good for Trump's wife should not be good for others?

[Edited on 10/23/2018 by MartinD28]


pops42 - 10/23/2018 at 12:24 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
I hate to say it but maybe Mexico should take them.


Whimsical to say the least
Why should mexico take them?, they are mostly from central america?. trump hasn't secured the border like he said he would, has he?.


When Trump follows through with his campaign promise for Mexico to pay for the wall, and when pigs like Trump fly is when Trump will secure the border.


So, with this "caravan" on the way, the Wall would be a Good idea?

What do you propose our response at the border should be if they arrive and demonstrate, demanding entry?
Do you think a wall would stop 7000 people?.


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 12:26 AM

quote:
Should your tax dollars pay for it?


I would prefer that over seeing my tax $$ better the lives of those who choose to bypass the law and enter Illegally.


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 12:27 AM

quote:
Do you think a wall would stop 7000 people?.


The attitude of the left hasn't worked/is not working.


MartinD28 - 10/23/2018 at 12:29 AM

quote:
quote:
Should your tax dollars pay for it?


I would prefer that over seeing my tax $$ better the lives of those who choose to bypass the law and enter Illegally.


So it's a binary choice? How about answering as an absolute.

You don't hold Trump accountable for his campaign promises for Mexico to pay for the wall? That way he doesn't screw over the taxpayers of this country.


pops42 - 10/23/2018 at 12:32 AM

quote:
quote:
Do you think a wall would stop 7000 people?.


The attitude of the left hasn't worked/is not working.
WTF are you talking about? trump and the repubicants are in charge now!, what are they doing???.


LeglizHemp - 10/23/2018 at 12:33 AM

Maybe we should discuss this as centrists, as most americans are.


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 12:42 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Do you think a wall would stop 7000 people?.


The attitude of the left hasn't worked/is not working.
WTF are you talking about?


Different ideals and goals. Does not the left disagree wholeheartedly with the idea of a wall?

Do you think the border should be open?...Or should we hire 3X as many border agents?...other thoughts?

quote:
trump and the repubicants are in charge now!, what are they doing???.


Do you think they meeting with any resistance from The Democrats?


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 02:21 AM

quote:
Why should this burden fall to the taxpayers of this Republic?


And there it is, “a burden on me”.

quote:
I would prefer that over seeing my tax $$ better the lives of those who choose to bypass the law and enter Illegally.


So it’s your high regard for the law that irks you about them, huh? Yeah sure!



jkeller - 10/23/2018 at 02:27 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Do you think a wall would stop 7000 people?.


The attitude of the left hasn't worked/is not working.
WTF are you talking about?


Different ideals and goals. Does not the left disagree wholeheartedly with the idea of a wall?

Do you think the border should be open?...Or should we hire 3X as many border agents?...other thoughts?

quote:
trump and the repubicants are in charge now!, what are they doing???.


Do you think they meeting with any resistance from The Democrats?


They control both houses of Congress and are in the Oval Office. How can the Democrats stop them from anything?


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 02:40 AM

quote:
I would prefer that over seeing my tax $$ better the lives of those who choose to bypass the law and enter Illegally.


So it’s your high regard for the law that irks you about them, huh? Yeah sure!


I'm gonna go out on a limb and guess this is your way of alluding to racism.

Tell me what people of any skin color/race who choose to come here Illegally know about Liberty and what we have gone through here as a society to embrace it?


pops42 - 10/23/2018 at 02:42 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Do you think a wall would stop 7000 people?.


The attitude of the left hasn't worked/is not working.
WTF are you talking about?


Different ideals and goals. Does not the left disagree wholeheartedly with the idea of a wall?

Do you think the border should be open?...Or should we hire 3X as many border agents?...other thoughts?

quote:
trump and the repubicants are in charge now!, what are they doing???.


Do you think they meeting with any resistance from The Democrats?
They hold the majority [republicants], and are the current ruling party.


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 02:47 AM

quote:
Tell me what people of any skin color/race who choose to come here Illegally know about Liberty and what we have gone through here as a society to embrace it?


I wouldn’t be so arrogant to think I know what others have been through. Why don’t you ask this question to some old-school Italian, Irish, and Russian familes who are sure to know a few illegals? They’ll gladly inform you I’m sure.


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 02:50 AM

quote:
quote:
Tell me what people of any skin color/race who choose to come here Illegally know about Liberty and what we have gone through here as a society to embrace it?


I wouldn’t be so arrogant to think I know what others have been through. Why don’t you ask this question to some old-school Italian, Irish, and Russian familes who are sure to know a few illegals? They’ll gladly inform you I’m sure.


Key word in your quote: "Old School"

We are on such different wavelengths, I don't know why I bother


BrerRabbit - 10/23/2018 at 03:29 PM

This caravan thing is an organized invading force that has declared illegal intent and as such is an army of war. Stop it with a measure of force fitting the force it brings. No shooting.

This is not the same as people privately sneaking across in small groups, it is an open declaration of threat, and an announcement to the world of defiance of US sovereignty. We need to stop this wave, easy enough, in a calm and civil fashion.

[Edited on 10/23/2018 by BrerRabbit]


Muleman1994 - 10/23/2018 at 03:41 PM

The U.S. is a sovereign nation and has the right to control its borders. President Trump is doing his job and the Democrats are throwing a fit yet again. Too bad.

The Democrats are desperate for the Latino vote, citizen or illegal alien. After losing middle-class Democrats because of their socialist positions the Democrats have become frantic to regain power.
The Democrats do not want a solution, they just want the issue.

President Trump offered the Democrats a solution for their “Dreamers” fiasco. The Democrats refused that and any other immigration reforms. Liberal activist judgers have mage it almost impossible for the U.S. to properly process immigrants. Fortunately, those judge’s rulings are about to be over turned by The Supreme Court.

The Democrats and Fake News claim that the people in the “caravan” are women and small children. The majority are young men as evidenced by the pictures and videos.

Many of the young men in the caravan are carrying the Guatemalan and Honduran flags. If they are so proud of their countries, why don’t they stay and fight?

The U.S. does not need unskilled labor that does not speak English. We need exactly what President Trump is calling for: a merit-based immigration system which is supported by the American People.

The Border Patrol in Texas alone has apprehended almost 800 Middle Eastern men in 2018. All but two dozen have already been deported.

President Trump will stop the invaders.


BrerRabbit - 10/23/2018 at 03:48 PM

This is a nobrainer. Any president would stop this nonsense. No need to dither into cheap heroics. Just turn them around.


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 04:06 PM

quote:
This caravan thing is an organized invading force that has declared illegal intent and as such is an army of war. Stop it with a measure of force fitting the force it brings. No shooting.

This is not the same as people privately sneaking across in small groups, it is an open declaration of threat, and an announcement to the world of defiance of US sovereignty. We need to stop this wave, easy enough, in a calm and civil fashion.


"in a calm and civil fashion"....

It has a "Declared Illegal intent and as such is an army of war"..."No shooting"?

Interesting. And just how is that to be accomplished?...If this "caravan" reaches the U.S. border with Mexico, troops of some sort will need to be present, either the National Guard or the Military. We won't be posting any type of force on the Mexican side. How can this possibly be non-confrontational?....

Mexico would almost have to be an active participant here, allowing them to get this far, their Gov't thinking..."Trump and his wall, hahahaha".....Well, sorry to say this will probably do a lot to strengthen the argument that a Wall is absolutely necessary. But, the leftists will be there with their signs claiming ALL of these people are fleeing abusive Gov'ts and want nothing more than an opportunity to escape poverty and a cruel regime. Funny how all of these extremely poor individuals have found the resources to walk how far? (Approx 1400 miles) with food, clothing, water, shelter being supplied by whom?

Just ask yourself, "I have the means, how much would it cost me to walk 1,400 miles"?


Build the wall!


BrerRabbit - 10/23/2018 at 04:30 PM

quote:
How can this possibly be non-confrontational?....


Confrontation does not require firing on an unarmed adversary.

Calm and civil, you didn't like that either. This is a symbolic demonstration, testing the US. 7000 people is what, a couple Beacon Theaters? Not a big deal. Yes it is stacking up to be a drama - "the whole world is watching" this one, as is intended by the players. This is where the US could totally blow it by overreacting, or take a great opportunity to show the world how a civilized people manages a tricky situation.

Or get all worked up and turn it into a fiasco. Your choice.


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 04:42 PM

quote:
Many of the young men in the caravan are carrying the Guatemalan and Honduran flags. If they are so proud of their countries, why don’t they stay and fight?


You don’t understand why Central Americans would want to immigrate to the US? Yikes!

quote:
The U.S. does not need unskilled labor that does not speak English. We need exactly what President Trump is calling for: a merit-based immigration system which is supported by the American People.


This opinion probably isn’t too popular with the red state farmers, and construction companies throughout the US.


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 04:45 PM

quote:
quote:
How can this possibly be non-confrontational?....



Calm and civil, you didn't like that either.


Calm and Civil is always the preferred option. I am wondering how this statement "This caravan thing is an organized invading force that has declared illegal intent and as such is an army of war"...

....reflects calm & civil?


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 04:52 PM

quote:
quote:
Many of the young men in the caravan are carrying the Guatemalan and Honduran flags. If they are so proud of their countries, why don’t they stay and fight?


You don’t understand why Central Americans would want to immigrate to the US? Yikes!


Why are they not waving U.S. Flags? According to your logic, they wish to emigrate here and work, take advantage of opportunity. On a World stage, would not more sympathy be garnered by showing a Love and respect for a Culture you are attempting to embrace?

NO!..They are proud of their homelands!...That is exactly why they are leaving.....

Hilarious


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 04:54 PM

quote:
Well, sorry to say this will probably do a lot to strengthen the argument that a Wall is absolutely necessary.


Serious question, have you ever spoken to a Mexican who crossed into the US illegally about this proposed idea?

quote:
But, the leftists will be there with their signs claiming ALL of these people are fleeing abusive Gov'ts and want nothing more than an opportunity to escape poverty and a cruel regime.


No, not all Democrats and “leftists” will be saying that, but go ahead and childishly believe all people in a political party are exactly the same.

quote:
Funny how all of these extremely poor individuals have found the resources to walk how far? (Approx 1400 miles) with food, clothing, water, shelter being supplied by whom?


Because they can find the resources on this particular journey, then there must be plenty of resources and a safe environment 24/7/365? Surely you aren’t suggesting such a thing.


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 04:59 PM

quote:
On a World stage, would not more sympathy be garnered by showing a Love and respect for a Culture you are attempting to embrace?

NO!..They are proud of their homelands!...That is exactly why they are leaving.....


See it as you wish, but I’ve read that many of them are trying to raise awareness about their countries’ issues, hence the flags. You choose to be cynical and that’s your right......and character.

[Edited on 10/23/2018 by BoytonBrother]


BrerRabbit - 10/23/2018 at 05:00 PM

Ok, I see your complaint, the "army of war" , thx. Meaning a declared organized intent . I guess it does sound inflammatory - used it to define it as opposed to individual border crossing , which is not a declared act of conflict, and clarify the nature of the force. This is a political action.

Nonviolent Civil Disobedience is considered a form of warfare, it is studied at West Point, you know that? It is harder to manage civil disobedience than armed conflict, as the cost in trust to a govt that cuts down unarmed people is heavier than physical losses. Look at the impact of a few deaths at Kent State - a crushing defeat for the armed retaliation.

[Edited on 10/23/2018 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 05:03 PM

quote:
Funny how all of these extremely poor individuals have found the resources to walk how far? (Approx 1400 miles) with food, clothing, water, shelter being supplied by whom?


Because they can find the resources on this particular journey, then there must be plenty of resources and a safe environment 24/7/365? Surely you aren’t suggesting such a thing.


That, is exactly what I am suggesting.

We are not the solution to the 3rd world's problems.

How much of your paycheck are you willing to donate to this plight on a regular basis? Surely, one donation will not fix this. See, this is the left in a nutshell, an expectation that this issue needs to be addressed and that everyone here must share in that burden. To decline is to be Racist, there can be NO other reason.

I refuse. You however, can donate all you want.


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 05:05 PM

quote:
Ok, I see your complaint, the "army of war" , thx. Meaning a declared organized intent . I guess it does sound inflammatory - used it to define it as opposed to individual border crossing , which is not a declared act of conflict, and clarify the nature of the force.

Nonviolent Civil Disobedience is considered a form of warfare, it is studied at West Point, you know that? It is harder to manage civil disobedience than armed conflict, as the cost in trust to a govt that cuts down unarmed people is heavier than physical losses. Look at the impact of a few deaths at Kent State - a crushing defeat for the armed retaliation.


Fair, thoughtful and appreciated, Thanks for expounding and enjoy the day.


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 06:04 PM

[quote[See, this is the left in a nutshell, an expectation that this issue needs to be addressed and that everyone here must share in that burden. To decline is to be Racist




And there it is. BIGVictim of the left strikes again. So burdened and unfairly judged!!!!!!!! Never about anything else.


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 06:44 PM

quote:
So burdened


Only through my Tax$$ funding Illegal Immigrants


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 07:31 PM

quote:
Only through my Tax$$ funding Illegal Immigrants


We can’t control where our tax dollars go, and we’ll all always be paying for it - why feel burdened by it?


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 07:34 PM

quote:
quote:
Only through my Tax$$ funding Illegal Immigrants


We can’t control where our tax dollars go, and we’ll all always be paying for it - why feel burdened by it?


Because we have HOMELESS VETERANS sleeping in the streets.

Priorities


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 07:47 PM

quote:
Because we have HOMELESS VETERANS sleeping in the streets.

Priorities


How is this your financial burden?


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 08:28 PM

quote:
quote:
Because we have HOMELESS VETERANS sleeping in the streets.

Priorities


How is this your financial burden?


Go away, please

OK, you have forced my hand and now, I must use a disparaging, belittling phrase.

You are a child. That makes twice in one day I have been mean, having called you a Clown and a Child.

How will you respond?, because I know you can not walk away.


BoytonBrother - 10/23/2018 at 09:08 PM

[quoteGo away, please

OK, you have forced my hand and now, I must use a disparaging, belittling phrase.

You are a child. That makes twice in one day I have been mean, having called you a Clown and a Child.

How will you respond?, because I know you can not walk away.




Holy meltdown! LOL! Look at your reaction to “how is it your financial burden”. You are by far the most sensitive person in the Whipping Post.

If I respond to your name-calling, it means “I can’t walk away.”.....so bizarre. Why can’t you handle simple questioning without losing your cool?

You disparage people whenever you feel like it, and then meltdown the second someone gives it right back to you.



Muleman1994 - 10/23/2018 at 09:30 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Because we have HOMELESS VETERANS sleeping in the streets.

Priorities


How is this your financial burden?


Go away, please

OK, you have forced my hand and now, I must use a disparaging, belittling phrase.

You are a child. That makes twice in one day I have been mean, having called you a Clown and a Child.

How will you respond?, because I know you can not walk away.

__________________________________________________________

You are trying to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
His childish reactions fail to mature.


[Edited on 10/23/2018 by Muleman1994]


BIGV - 10/23/2018 at 09:45 PM

quote:
and then meltdown the second someone gives it right back to you.


"Meltdown" lol

What a Clown


gina - 10/23/2018 at 10:41 PM

If we want them to stop coming, there has to be a real deterrant.

We could put them on a big boat and send them to Cuba and tell them this is our thank you for the Marielita boat lift refugees they sent us.


Muleman1994 - 10/24/2018 at 03:41 PM

President Trump is doing exactly what both Obama and Clinton supported. Schumer also made similar comments.

The difference is that only President Trump is doing something about it where Obama and Clinton failed to act:



"We are a generous and welcoming people here in the United States," But those who enter the country illegally and those who employ them disrespect the rule of law and they are showing disregard for those who are following the law. We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently and lawfully to become immigrants into this country."
- Obama


"All Americans ... are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country," The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That's why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens."

"We are a nation of immigrants," Clinton added. "But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it."
- Clinton

Videos included:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-cites-2005-obama-remarks-to-support- immigration-policy


porkchopbob - 10/24/2018 at 03:51 PM

quote:
The difference is that only President Trump is doing something about it where Obama and Clinton failed to act:


False.

Every administration has deported illegal immigrants, with record numbers during Obama's first term. The difference is Trump has made a lot of fools believe that wasn't happening and vilified immigrants and refugees.


Muleman1994 - 10/24/2018 at 05:11 PM

quote:
quote:
The difference is that only President Trump is doing something about it where Obama and Clinton failed to act:


False.

Every administration has deported illegal immigrants, with record numbers during Obama's first term. The difference is Trump has made a lot of fools believe that wasn't happening and vilified immigrants and refugees.



Liar.

President Trump has never "vilified immigrants and refugees".
He has called out illegal aliens just as Obama and Clinton have done.

You would benefit by getting informed and stop lying.


pops42 - 10/24/2018 at 05:21 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The difference is that only President Trump is doing something about it where Obama and Clinton failed to act:


False.

Every administration has deported illegal immigrants, with record numbers during Obama's first term. The difference is Trump has made a lot of fools believe that wasn't happening and vilified immigrants and refugees.



Liar.

President Trump has never "vilified immigrants and refugees".
He has called out illegal aliens just as Obama and Clinton have done.

You would benefit by getting informed and stop lying.


YOU LIE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXYXaUJ4ROOnly a moron/traitor would support a lying, scumbag, traitor like trump, who is on his knees and totally controlled by a sworn enemy of the United States [putin]

[Edited on 10/24/2018 by pops42]


porkchopbob - 10/24/2018 at 05:41 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The difference is that only President Trump is doing something about it where Obama and Clinton failed to act:

False.

Every administration has deported illegal immigrants, with record numbers during Obama's first term. The difference is Trump has made a lot of fools believe that wasn't happening and vilified immigrants and refugees.

Liar.

President Trump has never "vilified immigrants and refugees".
He has called out illegal aliens just as Obama and Clinton have done.

You would benefit by getting informed and stop lying.

Like I said, there are a lot of fools Trump has duped, count yourself among them if you like. Neither Obama, Clinton, nor Bush, ever called illegal immigrants "animals" or told people they'd be "overrun" by "violent" illegal immigrants.


sckeys - 10/24/2018 at 06:07 PM

quote:
quote:
The difference is that only President Trump is doing something about it where Obama and Clinton failed to act:


False.

Every administration has deported illegal immigrants, with record numbers during Obama's first term. The difference is Trump has made a lot of fools believe that wasn't happening and vilified immigrants and refugees.


You can’t use facts here. No no, you’ve got to make one up that’s better like “ And Obama bought em cars with money donated to the Clinton Foundation by the devil”


BoytonBrother - 10/24/2018 at 06:19 PM

quote:
President Trump is doing exactly what both Obama and Clinton supported.


Interesting. So then Trump and his supporters are backing an Obama and Clinton policy? Why would Trump copy a liberal left-wing policy?


BIGV - 10/24/2018 at 06:48 PM

quote:
Every administration has deported illegal immigrants


Yeah, almost like an obligated Presidential/Congressional declaration of, "Look we did our part", when in truth the problem simply lies in two places. Mexico's corrupt Gov't absolutely refuses to use its resources in a manner that will benefit its own citizens. 2) The United States absolutely refuses to legislate and prosecute companies that hire Illegal Immigrants. Stop dangling the carrot and hold Mexico accountable. We have the means to force them to move into the 21st century while at the same time fining the Hell out of any industry entangled in the Federal net.


Muleman1994 - 10/24/2018 at 06:54 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The difference is that only President Trump is doing something about it where Obama and Clinton failed to act:

False.

Every administration has deported illegal immigrants, with record numbers during Obama's first term. The difference is Trump has made a lot of fools believe that wasn't happening and vilified immigrants and refugees.

Liar.

President Trump has never "vilified immigrants and refugees".
He has called out illegal aliens just as Obama and Clinton have done.

You would benefit by getting informed and stop lying.

Like I said, there are a lot of fools Trump has duped, count yourself among them if you like. Neither Obama, Clinton, nor Bush, ever called illegal immigrants "animals" or told people they'd be "overrun" by "violent" illegal immigrants.



Try again son.

President Trump did not call illegal immigrants "animals". That lie was the lefties and the corrupt liberal media.

He called the MS-13 gang members, the rapists and killers supported by the Democrats, animals.


gina - 10/25/2018 at 12:01 AM

quote:
This caravan thing is an organized invading force that has declared illegal intent and as such is an army of war. Stop it with a measure of force fitting the force it brings. No shooting.

This is not the same as people privately sneaking across in small groups, it is an open declaration of threat, and an announcement to the world of defiance of US sovereignty. We need to stop this wave, easy enough, in a calm and civil fashion.

[Edited on 10/23/2018 by BrerRabbit]



There are some who believe Americans are financing this caravan!

https://onenewsnow.com/national-security/2018/10/24/proof-americans-are-fun ding-gang-middle-eastern-laced-caravan

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton – who heads his government watchdog group that has a team in Guatemala looking into the suspicious illegal migration – is calling on President Donald Trump to launch a criminal investigation to find the American roots of the mass exodus that originated in Honduras.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Spokesman Tyler Houlton verified that the caravan is riddled with numerous gang members and males with Middle Eastern and Asian origins.

The conservative Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández contended that migrants are being manipulated by the left to destabilize his country, and Vice President Mike Pence told The Washington Post that the Honduran leader revealed to him that Venezuela’s left-wing government was financing the caravan.


REMARKS: Groups organized to invade another country are not just mild mannered poor people seeking a better life. There are probably a bunch of them in the caravan, but there seems to be more sinister motives and others hiding behind that. Invasions must not be allowed. Other countries do not allow it and we must not either.


Muleman1994 - 10/25/2018 at 12:20 AM

Anyone notice how quite the Democrats have been on the illegal alien invasion (they call it a caravan) headed here?

Maybe they remember what Obama, Clinton and Schumer told them about the rule of law and that we must protect our country.


BoytonBrother - 10/25/2018 at 02:40 AM

quote:
Anyone notice how quite the Democrats have been


How quite what?


BrerRabbit - 10/25/2018 at 03:03 AM

LOL


WaitinForRain - 10/25/2018 at 03:34 AM

The simple end to the "immigration" problem is to prevent business from profiting
from this labor pool.

Since that is, of course, not allowed, business is more than happy
to have taxpayers foot the bill (haw haw haw) for the importation
of cheap labor.

After all, nobody is coming here if there are no jobs.
And Americans' wages are essentially stagnant for low paid work.

End of story.

[Edited on 10/25/2018 by WaitinForRain]


BoytonBrother - 10/25/2018 at 02:34 PM

quote:
The simple end to the "immigration" problem is to prevent business from profiting
from this labor pool.

Since that is, of course, not allowed, business is more than happy
to have taxpayers foot the bill (haw haw haw) for the importation
of cheap labor.

After all, nobody is coming here if there are no jobs.
And Americans' wages are essentially stagnant for low paid work.

End of story.


Exactly. But some in Trump’s camp would rather escalate hostility towards those at the bottom rung of the ladder that flee. Sad.


gina - 10/25/2018 at 10:05 PM

Trump is sending 800 military troops to the border, i think he needs more, 14,000 people are reportedly coming.

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/foreign-invasion-will-us-military-con front-migrants-at-border_10232018


AND somebody is handing out money to these up and coming invaders, see the video

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/video-someone-is-handing-out-stacks-of-cash- to-the-migrants-headed-to-the-united-states_102018




[Edited on 10/25/2018 by gina]


BrerRabbit - 10/25/2018 at 11:00 PM

At any rate, back to the original question, "Why is the immigration problem so difficult?"

Legal immigration is a difficult problem due to the miles of red tape that must be dealt with, along with many other hurdles to gaining citizenship. I once considered a move to Victoria BC, but gave up when faced with the stack of paperwork. In addition, immigrants have always faced problems adjusting to their new home, what with competition for housing and employment, as well as the problem of being accepted socially.

Illegal immigration presents its own set of serious problems: exploitation by smugglers, exposure to piracy, privation, and the elements, and an uncertain fate if apprehended, or abuse at the hands of the unscrupulous who take advantage of their precarious illegal status, criminally low wages, any number of problems.


Muleman1994 - 10/25/2018 at 11:52 PM

President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.


jkeller - 10/26/2018 at 12:20 AM

quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.


Muleman1994 - 10/26/2018 at 03:04 PM

quote:
quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.




The Republicans do not "control" both houses of Congress. The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress because The American People threw the Democrats out of control.

To pass immigration legislation, how many votes is required in The House and The Senate?


BrerRabbit - 10/26/2018 at 03:18 PM

quote:
how many votes is required


How many votes are required


Muleman1994 - 10/26/2018 at 03:57 PM

quote:
quote:
how many votes is required


How many votes are required



Yet you cannot answer the question just like keller the uninformed.


BrerRabbit - 10/26/2018 at 10:33 PM

I am fine with free English tutoring, but I don't do research for those too lazy to bother, but since you could not resist attacking me personally in this case I will make an exception:

Simple majority in the House to pass a bill - 218 votes out of 435.
Repubs have 235 votes - looks like you have some defectors there.

In Senate, 51 out of 100. There are 51 Republicans, so again the purge seems to be failing. 60 seats for filibuster proof majority - but filibusters are not the chief cause of sabotage of Republican legislation. It is division among Republicans.

Oh well, maybe someday you will enjoy lockstep majority, but for now there is still independent action.


Muleman1994 - 10/26/2018 at 10:49 PM

quote:
I am fine with free English tutoring, but I don't do research for those too lazy to bother, but since you could not resist attacking me personally in this case I will make an exception:

Simple majority in the House to pass a bill - 218 votes out of 435.
Repubs have 235 votes - looks like you have some defectors there.

In Senate, 51 out of 100. There are 51 Republicans, so again the purge seems to be failing. 60 seats for filibuster proof majority - but filibusters are not the chief cause of sabotage of Republican legislation. It is division among Republicans.

Oh well, maybe someday you will enjoy lockstep majority, but for now there is still independent action.



"Simple majority in the House"

Wrong.

You and keller might want to take a basic civics course.

To pass immigration reform legislation 2/3 of the House must vote in the affirmative and 60 Senators.

The Democrats refuse to support any immigration reform legislation.


BrerRabbit - 10/26/2018 at 11:18 PM

quote:
"Simple majority in the House"

Wrong.



From the US House of Reps site:

https://www.house.gov/the-house-explained/the-legislative-process

If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval.


sckeys - 10/26/2018 at 11:26 PM

The talking point today is anything but the health care pre existing fight and the bomb situation that they have called a hoax for 2 days.


jkeller - 10/26/2018 at 11:31 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.




The Republicans do not "control" both houses of Congress. The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress because The American People threw the Democrats out of control.

To pass immigration legislation, how many votes is required in The House and The Senate?


Simple majority in each house.


Muleman1994 - 10/26/2018 at 11:35 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.




The Republicans do not "control" both houses of Congress. The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress because The American People threw the Democrats out of control.

To pass immigration legislation, how many votes is required in The House and The Senate?


Simple majority in each house.



Go back to school junior.
While you are there try to learn the difference between control of the House vs. a majority.




jkeller - 10/26/2018 at 11:48 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.




The Republicans do not "control" both houses of Congress. The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress because The American People threw the Democrats out of control.

To pass immigration legislation, how many votes is required in The House and The Senate?


Simple majority in each house.



Go back to school junior.
While you are there try to learn the difference between control of the House vs. a majority.






You skipped by BrerRabbit's post.


From the US House of Reps site:

https://www.house.gov/the-house-explained/the-legislative-process

If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval.


Muleman1994 - 10/26/2018 at 11:54 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.




The Republicans do not "control" both houses of Congress. The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress because The American People threw the Democrats out of control.

To pass immigration legislation, how many votes is required in The House and The Senate?


Simple majority in each house.



Go back to school junior.
While you are there try to learn the difference between control of the House vs. a majority.






You skipped by BrerRabbit's post.


From the US House of Reps site:

https://www.house.gov/the-house-explained/the-legislative-process

If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval.




The simple majority vote in The House is needed to move a bill to The Senate.
The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval requiring a 2/3 majority for final passage in The House.


[Edited on 10/26/2018 by Muleman1994]


jkeller - 10/27/2018 at 12:10 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.




The Republicans do not "control" both houses of Congress. The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress because The American People threw the Democrats out of control.

To pass immigration legislation, how many votes is required in The House and The Senate?


Simple majority in each house.



Go back to school junior.
While you are there try to learn the difference between control of the House vs. a majority.






You skipped by BrerRabbit's post.


From the US House of Reps site:

https://www.house.gov/the-house-explained/the-legislative-process

If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval.




The simple majority vote in The House is needed to move a bill to The Senate.
The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval requiring a 2/3 majority for final passage in The House.


[Edited on 10/26/2018 by Muleman1994]


So, you are saying the the Houss of Representatives web site is lying? Nowhere does it say that a 2/3 majority is needed. OK, so let's go back to the actual voting in June.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/394437-house-rejects-second-gop-immigrat ion-bill

Only 121 Republicans backed it, compared to 193 for the earlier measure. Two Republicans did not cast votes on Wednesday, while 112 Republicans voted against it.

Care to correct your invalid claims?


Muleman1994 - 10/27/2018 at 12:18 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.




The Republicans do not "control" both houses of Congress. The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress because The American People threw the Democrats out of control.

To pass immigration legislation, how many votes is required in The House and The Senate?


Simple majority in each house.



Go back to school junior.
While you are there try to learn the difference between control of the House vs. a majority.






You skipped by BrerRabbit's post.


From the US House of Reps site:

https://www.house.gov/the-house-explained/the-legislative-process

If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval.




The simple majority vote in The House is needed to move a bill to The Senate.
The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval requiring a 2/3 majority for final passage in The House.


[Edited on 10/26/2018 by Muleman1994]


So, you are saying the the Houss of Representatives web site is lying? Nowhere does it say that a 2/3 majority is needed. OK, so let's go back to the actual voting in June.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/394437-house-rejects-second-gop-immigrat ion-bill

Only 121 Republicans backed it, compared to 193 for the earlier measure. Two Republicans did not cast votes on Wednesday, while 112 Republicans voted against it.

Care to correct your invalid claims?



The vote in June was not a vote on a reconciled and final bill.

The original quote is conveniently incomplete and stops before the requirements for the final vote.

Keep trying. At some point you might learn something.



jkeller - 10/27/2018 at 12:46 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
President Trump offer the Democrats a deal that included immigration reform that would have solved the problems along with a solution to help the so-called “Dreamers”.

The Democrats refused to even discuss the matter.

The Democrats do not want a solution, they want the issue.




The Republicans control both houses of Congress. The only way the deal failed is if some Republicans did not support it.




The Republicans do not "control" both houses of Congress. The Republicans have the majority in both houses of Congress because The American People threw the Democrats out of control.

To pass immigration legislation, how many votes is required in The House and The Senate?


Simple majority in each house.



Go back to school junior.
While you are there try to learn the difference between control of the House vs. a majority.






You skipped by BrerRabbit's post.


From the US House of Reps site:

https://www.house.gov/the-house-explained/the-legislative-process

If the bill passes by simple majority (218 of 435), the bill moves to the Senate. In the Senate, the bill is assigned to another committee and, if released, debated and voted on. Again, a simple majority (51 of 100) passes the bill. Finally, a conference committee made of House and Senate members works out any differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill. The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval.




The simple majority vote in The House is needed to move a bill to The Senate.
The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval requiring a 2/3 majority for final passage in The House.


[Edited on 10/26/2018 by Muleman1994]


So, you are saying the the Houss of Representatives web site is lying? Nowhere does it say that a 2/3 majority is needed. OK, so let's go back to the actual voting in June.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/394437-house-rejects-second-gop-immigrat ion-bill

Only 121 Republicans backed it, compared to 193 for the earlier measure. Two Republicans did not cast votes on Wednesday, while 112 Republicans voted against it.

Care to correct your invalid claims?



The vote in June was not a vote on a reconciled and final bill.

The original quote is conveniently incomplete and stops before the requirements for the final vote.

Keep trying. At some point you might learn something.





In order to have a reconciled bill, a bill must pass in each house and then be reconciled. Since the bill failed in the house, there can be no reconciled bill.


BrerRabbit - 10/27/2018 at 04:23 AM

quote:
The original quote is conveniently incomplete and stops before the requirements for the final vote.


Correct, for pertinence and brevity I left off the last bit of text on the House of Reps page:

"The Government Printing Office prints the revised bill in a process called enrolling. The President has 10 days to sign or veto the enrolled bill."


This bit from the link jkeller posted is a helpful clarification:

"House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), who said he was unsurprised by the outcome, signaled the GOP is ready to move on.

You know, if there's — if there is a bill that gets 218 Republicans, obviously that's something we'd be very interested in. A lot of months have been trying to get that kind of an agreement; it hasn't happened yet, he said."

OK, why do you suppose he said '218 Republicans'? Because that is the simple majority. So, even the representatives of the majority of the simple who voted for Trump are not able to achieve a simple majority.

The Republicans have the ball, they just aren't running with it.



[Edited on 10/27/2018 by BrerRabbit]


BrerRabbit - 10/27/2018 at 05:47 AM

quote:
The simple majority vote in The House is needed to move a bill to The Senate.
The resulting bill returns to the House and Senate for final approval requiring a 2/3 majority for final passage in The House.


Bunk. If a bill passes both houses it is a done deal and goes to the President. It only gets voted on again if there are discrepancies between the House and Senate versions and the bill goes to conference, then the conference report goes back to the floor and is voted on, again passed by simple majority, same as the first vote - not your two-thirds majority porcine cleanser.

No point in posting a link to the White House, you can find it easily. They spell it out for you in plain English.


sckeys - 10/31/2018 at 02:14 PM

USA, USA,. We gonna stop this invasion of the enemy on the border. These foot soldiers of the Pelosi/Obama evil democrat party will be no match for the US forces. President Trump will lead us to a glorious victory that will be huge. Remember to pray and support the troops on our southern border. As Fox and the evangelicals would say, don’t be critical of our president during a time of war and god bless.

[Edited on 10/31/2018 by sckeys]


BIGV - 10/31/2018 at 02:21 PM

quote:
USA, USA,. We gonna stop this invasion of the enemy on the border. These foot soldiers of the Pelosi/Obama evil democrat party will be no match for the US forces. President Trump will lead us to a glorious victory that will be huge. Remember to pray and support the troops on our southern border. As Fox and the evangelicals would say, don’t be critical of our president during a time of war and god bless.



And what do you suggest we do should this group reach the US border and try to gain entry without using a recognized Border Checkpoint?


jkeller - 10/31/2018 at 03:36 PM

quote:
quote:
USA, USA,. We gonna stop this invasion of the enemy on the border. These foot soldiers of the Pelosi/Obama evil democrat party will be no match for the US forces. President Trump will lead us to a glorious victory that will be huge. Remember to pray and support the troops on our southern border. As Fox and the evangelicals would say, don’t be critical of our president during a time of war and god bless.



And what do you suggest we do should this group reach the US border and try to gain entry without using a recognized Border Checkpoint?


They are not going to do that. Their plan is to go to a legal entry point and seek asylum. There is nothing illegal about that. And there is nothing that warrants sending troops to the border.


MartinD28 - 10/31/2018 at 03:45 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
USA, USA,. We gonna stop this invasion of the enemy on the border. These foot soldiers of the Pelosi/Obama evil democrat party will be no match for the US forces. President Trump will lead us to a glorious victory that will be huge. Remember to pray and support the troops on our southern border. As Fox and the evangelicals would say, don’t be critical of our president during a time of war and god bless.



And what do you suggest we do should this group reach the US border and try to gain entry without using a recognized Border Checkpoint?


They are not going to do that. Their plan is to go to a legal entry point and seek asylum. There is nothing illegal about that. And there is nothing that warrants sending troops to the border.

But Trump says there are MS13's and Middle Easterners in the mix. What are we do about them? We know Trump would never speak to anything w/out proof or would never lie.


BIGV - 10/31/2018 at 03:56 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
USA, USA,. We gonna stop this invasion of the enemy on the border. These foot soldiers of the Pelosi/Obama evil democrat party will be no match for the US forces. President Trump will lead us to a glorious victory that will be huge. Remember to pray and support the troops on our southern border. As Fox and the evangelicals would say, don’t be critical of our president during a time of war and god bless.



And what do you suggest we do should this group reach the US border and try to gain entry without using a recognized Border Checkpoint?


They are not going to do that. Their plan is to go to a legal entry point and seek asylum. There is nothing illegal about that.


Does that act in itself guarantee entry?.....Seeking Asylum?...Why are there no American Flags in this group?

quote:
And there is nothing that warrants sending troops to the border


There certainly is if they as a group are denied entry. And out of whose pocket does the $$ come to pay for their needs should they be allowed to enter the U.S.?


gina - 10/31/2018 at 03:57 PM

There are many issues surrounding the caravan.

1. There are sincere poor people who just want to come to America to have a better standard of living and better quality of life.

a) How many of those can we take in?
b) In what time frame?

The time frame is necessary because the people admitted to this country have to be housed and taken care of with money, food, clothing, housing, education, medical care. That is why limits must be placed.


2. Is there one set of TIME LIMITS for a country ACTIVELY experiencing WAR and another set of time limits for a country not actively at war? Remember the Syrian refugees where many countries of the world were asked to take them in. They had a REAL reason to seek refugee/sanctuary outside their native country.

3. Should the words SANCTUARY STATUS for REFUGEES and SANCTUARY STATUS for ASYLUM seekers be re-defined and tweeked? (I think so)


4. What difference should ASYLUM SEEKERS have in obtaining permanent status to stay in America?

a) What are the legal requirments that need to be met to obtain asylum status?


5. How do we define INVASION, and what responses can be meted out for those seeking to invade a country (like ours) illegally?


6. Can we just close the borders with Mexico till we figure all this out?


7. What are the responsibilities of other countries who are assisting (aiding and abetting) this caravan? Why did Mexico not stop them when they crossed from Honduras and other nations into their country or did they do that legally and then just meet with their "fixers" who are helping them along the route to the U.S.?


These are the questions that need to be answered in the short term.


https://www.yahoo.com/news/feeding-caravan-hysteria-trump-says-border-troop s-may-reach-15000-212436254.html









[Edited on 10/31/2018 by gina]


gina - 10/31/2018 at 10:13 PM

GINA'S REMARKS

LONGER TERM involves a much longer discussion because there is a very covert agenda going on, part of the destabilization of not only America, but also the world.

In order to bring in the one world government, sovereign states (nations/countries) must be taken down so that ONE ruler can be brought in to rule over them. If you want global domination then you have to take down all the sovereignty of individual countries. Afghanistan was first, Iraq was next, Libya, Egypt all had their governments removed and others put in their place. America has always been a Super Power, not an easy task to take America's sovereignty down, but that is just what the new world order, one world government, international order wants and plans to do. How? Civil war, martial law, economic collapse ushering in a new currency. It is a fact our financial budget is unsustainable.

Did you know that on 9-11-01 a BIG payment was due to China on debt that we owe them, we could not pay them, but that even was so cataclysmic and large in scope the world stood up and said oh no poor America, they are facing a terrorist threat, we will be nice and not hold them in default on the loan. We only make payment on the interest owed on the loan, not the actual loan itself, our debt is not sustainable.

The goal of the new/one/international world order is to have cities where people live and they will monitor and control all of that with the technology available. Credit cards got people used to being able to buy things without real money, just pay with plastic, worry about it later. Automatic bank payments of your bills no need for paper. Stores kept track of products with the bar codes. Every advance moving you to a cashless society. The government will give you your allotment from which you will buy and pay things, it will all be done electronically as you are doing now. They won't even have to send the repo man if you cannot pay for your car, the technology is there to just shut it off and you cannot drive it. (and to think it all started with on-star GPS technology). Did you know the 5G network now being put in your phones and telecommunications is also what is used in military weapon technology (the sound cannons for example), well it is.

The plan for the new/one/international order take over began long ago. In 1993 they wrote the idea of destabilizing the Middle East [Operation Clean Break]. Slowly that plan has been put into action with some bumps in the road and variances.

And what of America?

Do you remember the Jade Helm Exercises, done by the military to have a plan for Civil War in America and people were scratching their heads, what civil war, what would be fighting over that could cause a civil war? One former military man said it will start with benefits for food stamps and veterans being reduced. They will protest and march and call for justice. Justice will not come to them. Then other groups will join. You saw that pathetic attempt by the Occupy Wall Street people to start a revolution nobody wanted.

Well there is another angle. DESTABILIZE the borders. A prophetess named Annie told what she was given, and one of the prophecies was that ISIS troops would breach the US border coming in from Mexico. Once in America they would start blowing up elementary schools and ultimately they would kill 100,000 children and the war against the Middle East could erupt from that. We know FEMA bought all those bullets and citizens responded by spending weekends at Dicks getting supplies for their er hunting trips trying to be coy and covert about stockpiling bullets.

FEMA built camps to put people in who breached our borders from Mexico or Russia, or to be used in civil emergencies, ie. epidemics. The camps are there. There were built by Halliburton and modeled after the concentration camps from Germany. We have seen videos of the caskets where five bodies at a time can be put in, the caskets were found in Georgia. It was further uncovered and reported that guillotines were ordered from China, and now further reported blades for those guillotines were purchased from Mexico, AND cyanide has also been purchased BY FEMA.

WHAT DOES FEMA PLAN TO DO WITH CYANIDE? Use it in the camps to kill people as quickly and painlessly as possible. There is no other use for that substance.

https://www.thecommonsenseshow.com/osha-documentation-proves-fema-is-import ing-hydrogen-cyanide-theres-only-one-possible-use/

DAVE'S REMARKS

PAGE 1 OF 5
MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEET Prepared to U.S. OSHA, CMA, ANSI and Canadian WHMIS Standards 1. PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION

CHEMICAL NAME; CLASS: NON-FLAMMABLE GAS MIXTURE Containing the Following Component in a Nitrogen Balance Gas: Hydrogen Cyanide: 0.0001- 0.02% SYNONYMS: Not Applicable CHEMICAL FAMILY NAME: Not Applicable FORMULA: Not Applicable Document Number: 50024 Note: The Material Safety Data Sheet is for this gas mixture supplied in cylinders with 33 cubic feet (935 liters) or less gas capacity (DOT – 39 cylinders). This MSDS has been developed for various gas mixtures with the composition of components within the ranges listed in Section 2 (Composition and Information on Ingredients). Refer to the product label for information on the actual composition of the product.

PRODUCT USE: Calibration of Monitoring and Research Equipment U.S. SUPPLIER/MANUFACTURER’S NAME: CALGAZ
ADDRESS: 821 Chesapeake Drive Cambridge, MD 21613 BUSINESS PHONE: 1-410-228-6400 (8 a.m. to 5 p.m. U.S. EST)

General MSDS Information: 1-713-868-0440 Fax on Demand: 1-800-231-1366 EMERGENCY PHONE:

Chemtrec: United States/Canada/Puerto Rico: 1-800-424-9300 [24-hours] Chemtrec International: 1-703-527-3887 [24-hours]
COMPOSITION and INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
CHEMICAL NAME CAS # mole % EXPOSURE LIMITS IN AIR
ACGIH-TLV OSHA NIOSH OTHER TWA STEL PEL STEL IDLH ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
Hydrogen Cyanide 74-90-8 0.0001- 0.020%
NE 4.7

Chemtrec: United States/Canada/Puerto Rico: 1-800-424-9300 [24-hours] Chemtrec International: 1-703-527-3887 [24-hours]
COMPOSITION and INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
CHEMICAL NAME CAS # mole % EXPOSURE LIMITS IN AIR
ACGIH-TLV OSHA NIOSH OTHER TWA STEL PEL STEL IDLH ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
Hydrogen Cyanide 74-90-8 0.0001- 0.020%
NE 4.7
(ceiling) [skin]
10 (skin)
4.7 (skin)
50 NIOSH REL:
STEL = 4.7 (skin) DFG MAKs: TWA = 11.9 (skin) PEAK = 5•MAK 30 min., average
value Nitrogen 7727-37-9 Balance There are no specific exposure limits for Nitrogen. Nitrogen is a simple asphyxiant (SA).
Oxygen levels should be maintained above 19.5%.
NE = Not Established. See Section 16 for Definitions of Terms Used. NOTE (1): ALL WHMIS required information is included in appropriate sections based on the ANSI Z400.1-1998 format. This gas mixture has been classified in accordance with the hazard criteria of the CPR and the MSDS contains all the information required by the CPR.


THE THREE STEP PROCESS FOR TYRANNICAL CONTROL OF THE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES

When one examines the sum total of the meaning of various Executive Orders and administrative actions of FEMA and DHS, collectively, there emerges a clear picture of a three-step process to gain control of the population of the United States. The following has already been spelled out through Operation Cable Splicer, REX 84 and FM 39.4


PHASE ONE

Not everyone’s fate is determined when a communist/fascist coup takes over the government of the United States and suspends the Constitution. However, for some people, there exists the non-negotiable future of termination without due process. Decades ago, this is what Steve Quayle called the “Red List”.
Under Operation Rex 84 and Operation Cable Splicer, etc., there is a 3 step process to subjugate the American people.

Stage One of the plot is particularly heinous. FEMA likes to use the term “disrupters” who will be terminated with extreme prejudice. These people will be gathered up and taken to a remote location and executed. They most often will be taken from their homes between 3AM and 4AM, which is what the Gestapo did, so as to not arouse the attention of the community and to lessen the possibility of increasing resistance.

Along these lines, when a communist/fascist coup overtakes the government, Operation Cable Splicer/Garden Plot/Rex 84, will be in effect and FEMA and DHS will be in control (DHS was actually created and molded after the East German Stasi). The extreme actions of unwarranted arrests and mass executions are designed to remove the majority of the leadership or any resistance to the coup.

I have recounted before on the website of The Common Sense Show, the story of my long-term friend, a FEMA counter-bioterrorism expert, who said if the the powers that be cannot quell the rising tide of populism (please note this was said in the Pre-Trump days of 2012), that millions would be gassed. My FEMA friend bugged out to a secure location with like-minded people from FEMA because they saw the writing on the wall. Further, this paralleled the story of Rosebud, brought forth by the Hagmann’s, basically recounted the same intentions to “gas” the people in times of resistance to the new authority.

How will FEMA deal with these resisters? It just so happens that it is being reported in multiple publications that FEMA just purchased 2,500 gallons of hydrogen cyanide from a Brazilian chemical manufacturer, Askell Quimica. In light of Operation Cablesplicer et al, which is still on the books, the purchase of hydrogen cyanide can only mean one thing. The following Executive Order demonstrates that the globalists have been planning these actions against the American for a very long time.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate communities, build new housing with public funds, designate areas to be abandoned, and establish new locations for populations.
DHS has been preparing for the resistance to the coming new authority for a long time.

Under Operation Cable Splicer and Rex 84, all levels of government will be collapsed into one central authority and that centralized authority will be handed off to the global authority, presumably the United Nations or their proxy.


PHASE TWO

After the leadership of any potential resistance to the new authority is complete, Stage Two will be implemented. Stage Two will consist of the arrest of those not deemed to be in compliance with the new authority, as evidenced by belief systems or by overt actions. If you have wondered why the NSA finds is necessary to monitor every communication that you have, I just told you.

There will be a two-tiered approach to the citizen roundups that will occur. First, as an aside, there has been much discussion about the need to promulgate a false flag attack(s). If one can get the population to view the new authority as a rescuer from certain death, then the resistance to the take over will be considerably lessened. However, there will be those that resist and they will be seized and sent to re-education camps. The public justification for the arrest will fall into two categories (1) criminal charges related to treason and sedition; and, (2) mental health conditions requiring long-term “inpatient” therapy.

Back in 2008-9, I often reported on the importance of the DHS-created MIAC report. The MIAC report gives rise to the groups that are going to be sought out for “re-education”. Those groups included, but are not limited to Christians, Ron Paul supporters (today that could be translated to Donald Trump supporters), supporters of the Constitution, Second Amendment supporters will be targeted in particular.

This grainy video was leaded from a 2001 FEMA training session. The video clearly condemns the Founding Fathers as domestic terrorists.

This second group will be terminated if it is deemed that they cannot be re-educated. I have previously asked many of my sources how will they execute the millions that cannot be re-educated? I was told that that guillotines are the most efficient, but if they cannot keep up with demand, hydrogen cyanide will do quite nicely

There are a couple of ancillary facts that I have previously reported on that bears discussion at this point. The first account comes from the late FBI special informant, Larry Grathwohl, who penetrated the Weatherman Underground of Bill Ayers. The Weathermen Underground Leader, Bill Ayers, told former FBI Agent and informant, and my late friend, Larry Grathwohl, that he believed that when the Communist takeover happened, he would have to incarcerate 50 million Americans into re-education camps and exterminate 25 million of them. Larry was an FBI special informant who had penetrated the Underground and became a member in order to take down the organization by getting Bill Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dorne arrested.

This is the part that I would play the video of Larry recounting what Ayers told him about future FEMA camps, but Youtube recently took down the video because it “violates Youtube’s policy on hate speech”.

When one considers this Executive Order, one will understand why I have written about shopping malls, that can be easily converted to FEMA detention facilities, the Walmart conversions to FEMA Camps and the 2012 agreement between every professional sports league which allows DHS to use their facilities to be used as FEMA camps in times of “emergency”. The shopping malls conversions were part of an agreement entered into by Simon Properties, the largest owner of malls in North America.

This purchase(hydrogen cyanide) marks the third time in twelve months FEMA will have used foreign distributors to procure lethal items that could be used to maim or kill law-abiding Americans. In January, FEMA received a shipment of five hundred Chinese-made “smart guillotines,” and in March, they secretly ordered thousands of guillotine blades from a Mexican metal factory in Juarez.


Stage Three
Stage Three is ironic. It consists of the arrest of all collaborators and infiltrators who along with “economic disrupters” who will have their money confiscated, for it is estimated that half of the wealth in the USA is in their hands. In effect, this is where the transfer of wealth will take place. Along these lines, Operation Cable Splicer and Garden Plot, which are the two sub programs which will be implemented once the Rex 84 program is initiated for its proper purpose, will kick in and the monied class will arrested and many will be terminated. FEMA is the executive arm of the coming police state and thus will head up all operations. The Presidential Executive Orders already listed on the Federal Register also are part of the legal framework for this operation. This should give serious pause for Wall Street to keep supporting the Deep State as they are targeted for brown shirt treatment.

Conclusion by Dave:

We used to talk about FEMA camps as something that could be coming our way. FEMA camps are no on our doorstep and the only thing standing between FEMA camps and us, is Donald Trump.
Please mark this down, many of the people, on the inside, that I speak with who are convinced that REX 84 will be immediately implemented if Trump is ever taken from office. The Deep State will do anything and everything to stop the spirit of populism. If you think that America will repeat the heinous crimes of Nazi Germany, they will, if the Deep State is allowed to prevail.

FEMA is a rogue organization and the fact that they have ordered hydrogen cyanide should be a major concern to all. Oh, you don’t think that they would do this? then ask yourself why would anyone call the Founding Fathers terrorists? Why would DHS have already 600 billion rounds of hollow point ammunition to go with their 2500 assault vehicles? Are they being sent to Afghanistan or are they going to be turned loose on the American people?


REMARKS BY ME:

REMARKS: We are in a war. A spiritual war. If the wrong side wins, it means world enslavement. Pastor Paul Begley said "It's time for us to get off our behinds and get on the front lines". There are people who are coordinating this immigrant caravan, so that martial law will have to be implemented. If they create a national emergency, then when civil war emerges in America, martial law will be necessary and the deep state plan proceeds. Yes people will resist. Fema bought all those bullets to try to stop resisters. They put up those red light cameras with their feeds that can be monitored by the FBI (Comey even admitted that the red light cameras and city camera footages have feeds they can tap into to monitor the goings on in cities, he said this after the San Bernadino shootings remember that?) . Those cameras are all over here, even where there are no red lights like on parkways. If they get people in the FEMA camps, they will be as they were in the Nazi days, they will be death camps.

So caravans of uncontrollable migrants leads to national emergency - disruption of America - institution of martial law and the decline of the sovereignty of America and it's citizens and the war will be on. The war for the one world/new world/international order to try to rule the planet. Their goal is to get people into cities they will run, control them and enslave them. The rest of the people will be off to the FEMA camps to die. That is why this caravan matters.

Is Trump ordering the cyanide for FEMA? Nope, that rogue element within the govt. that does whatever it wants to is doing that. DRAIN THAT SWAMP!





[Edited on 10/31/2018 by gina]


gina - 11/1/2018 at 12:29 AM

Stefan Molyneaux's take on the caravan.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-AoXo9uKMk

Nobody even thought about the distance and that these people have to walk 2,300 miles. People in flip flops with no luggage are going to be able to do this in a couple of weeks!


Jerry - 11/1/2018 at 03:58 AM

It's very simple. Escort them across the border to camps. In the camps they are interviewed as to what status do they seek.
Do they seek long term asylum of more than 5 years.
Do they seek short term asylum of 2 or less years.
Do they seek to be recognized as a refugee from a conflict.
Do they wish to apply for an immigration visa?
Do they wish to become citizens?

When they declare their intentions, we offer to allow them to remain in the camps until their status is settled, a DNA sample is gathered, and a non-removable GPS bracelet is issued.

After the DNA check shows the subject has no issues through law enforcement, it is then used to determine if the subject really belongs with the family he claimed upon arrival.

No one is released except whole families who have a certified sponsor who is responsible for their behavior(physical and monetary) while waiting for their court appearance.

Families with small children should get first court appearance (out of this group) with husband/wife couples next. Then brother/sister, brother/brother, each type of family grouping, would come next as the courts clear.

If there are any unaccompanied children in the caravan, they are placed in foster homes after any medical problems are taken care of.

Speaking of which, upon arrival at the camps a military induction style medical exam should be given each person. Eye, ear, nose, and throat, bend over and smile, turn head and cough, urine-blood-stool samples, teeth, joints and bones, heart health, should all be done. Any one with a communicable disease is isolated
and treated.

Anyone who has had problems with law enforcement, been previously deported, gives false information on the asylum papers, will face immediate deportation. They will need to be loaded onto a military C-130, handcuffed with chains locked into the air frame, flown to an airport of their home country, and turned over to the local authorities.

Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.


BoytonBrother - 11/1/2018 at 02:05 PM

quote:
Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.


Sounds like you are bit unsettled by this news, would that be accurate?


Jerry - 11/1/2018 at 04:10 PM

quote:
quote:
Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.


Sounds like you are bit unsettled by this news, would that be accurate?


What is in my post that would make you think that?


BoytonBrother - 11/1/2018 at 04:20 PM

If you answer my question, I’ll continue the conversation.


Jerry - 11/1/2018 at 04:56 PM

quote:
If you answer my question, I’ll continue the conversation.


So you're going to set parameters for the ongoing "conversation", answer mine first and then I'll answer yours, by the same question.

I'll do it in caps with spacing so you can understand. Here's your answer.

"WHAT IS IN MY POST THAT WOULD MAKE YOU THINK THAT?"

Do you see anything in my post that makes me seem unsettled about the caravans?
Are you just trolling to see what reaction you can get?
Do you know anything about US history?


BoytonBrother - 11/1/2018 at 05:46 PM

Forget it. I got my answer.


Jerry - 11/1/2018 at 06:04 PM

quote:
Forget it. I got my answer.


No, you didn't.


BoytonBrother - 11/1/2018 at 07:52 PM

[quote[No, you didn't.




You are right. You never answered the question. My bad.


adhill58 - 11/1/2018 at 08:30 PM

The tax burden argument is difficult when you think of how much money actually goes through the federal budget.

When the recent hurricane hit Florida, the Air Force had to leave 17 stealth fighter jets in the hangar because they were non-operational because software had not been installed. It was a priority to get back to check on the damage because EACH of those planes cost the taxpayers $150,000,000.

By my reasoning, we could give 7,000 of our most desperate neighbors about $21,000 each ($150,000,000 total). That would go a long way to making a better life for their families in Honduras or Guatemala.

We would still have 16 non-operational jets at the base in Florida, and nobody's taxes would change.


BIGV - 11/1/2018 at 09:05 PM

quote:
The tax burden argument is difficult when you think of how much money actually goes through the federal budget.

When the recent hurricane hit Florida, the Air Force had to leave 17 stealth fighter jets in the hangar because they were non-operational because software had not been installed. It was a priority to get back to check on the damage because EACH of those planes cost the taxpayers $150,000,000.

By my reasoning, we could give 7,000 of our most desperate neighbors about $21,000 each ($150,000,000 total). That would go a long way to making a better life for their families in Honduras or Guatemala.

We would still have 16 non-operational jets at the base in Florida, and nobody's taxes would change.


Using that reasoning, I would love to have $21,000 as would my friends and family. or better yet, a Homeless VETERAN....I mean "what the hell"? right?..it all just gets eaten up by the Taxpayer, right?

Or, what about the next group of 7,000 and the next and the 7,000 who follow?


gina - 11/1/2018 at 11:31 PM

quote:
quote:
If you answer my question, I’ll continue the conversation.


So you're going to set parameters for the ongoing "conversation", answer mine first and then I'll answer yours, by the same question.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDfn7ZhmiZc


gina - 11/1/2018 at 11:39 PM

quote:
It's very simple. Escort them across the border to camps. In the camps they are interviewed as to what status do they seek.
Do they seek long term asylum of more than 5 years.
Do they seek short term asylum of 2 or less years.
Do they seek to be recognized as a refugee from a conflict.
Do they wish to apply for an immigration visa?
Do they wish to become citizens?

When they declare their intentions, we offer to allow them to remain in the camps until their status is settled, a DNA sample is gathered, and a non-removable GPS bracelet is issued.

After the DNA check shows the subject has no issues through law enforcement, it is then used to determine if the subject really belongs with the family he claimed upon arrival.

No one is released except whole families who have a certified sponsor who is responsible for their behavior(physical and monetary) while waiting for their court appearance.

Families with small children should get first court appearance (out of this group) with husband/wife couples next. Then brother/sister, brother/brother, each type of family grouping, would come next as the courts clear.

If there are any unaccompanied children in the caravan, they are placed in foster homes after any medical problems are taken care of.

Speaking of which, upon arrival at the camps a military induction style medical exam should be given each person. Eye, ear, nose, and throat, bend over and smile, turn head and cough, urine-blood-stool samples, teeth, joints and bones, heart health, should all be done. Any one with a communicable disease is isolated
and treated.

Anyone who has had problems with law enforcement, been previously deported, gives false information on the asylum papers, will face immediate deportation. They will need to be loaded onto a military C-130, handcuffed with chains locked into the air frame, flown to an airport of their home country, and turned over to the local authorities.

Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.



Jerry you need to run for Congress, you got some great answers!

Stefan Molyneaux pointed out that an asylum seeker must seek asylum in the first country whose border they cross that is a safe place. Mexico is safe in most places, therefore THEY should be the ones dealing with them, you get to trounce thru many countries till you find one you like the best.

Could a bunch of poor Americans go to Canada and demand they take us in and feed, clothe, house and give us free medical care and college educations?

I am also reminded of a plan from long ago to make Canada, the US and Mexico one united country called the NORTH AMERICAN UNION. Remember that? Is somebody still pushing for that plan?


BrerRabbit - 11/1/2018 at 11:44 PM


Figure rough fifty billion $ for wall. Another hundreds of billions for upkeep and defense. Don't have to do any math to see that for a miniscule fraction of that we could funnel a few pesos across to fund a human wall of mexicans keeping the rest out.


Jerry - 11/2/2018 at 12:57 AM

quote:
quote:
It's very simple. Escort them across the border to camps. In the camps they are interviewed as to what status do they seek.
Do they seek long term asylum of more than 5 years.
Do they seek short term asylum of 2 or less years.
Do they seek to be recognized as a refugee from a conflict.
Do they wish to apply for an immigration visa?
Do they wish to become citizens?

When they declare their intentions, we offer to allow them to remain in the camps until their status is settled, a DNA sample is gathered, and a non-removable GPS bracelet is issued.

After the DNA check shows the subject has no issues through law enforcement, it is then used to determine if the subject really belongs with the family he claimed upon arrival.

No one is released except whole families who have a certified sponsor who is responsible for their behavior(physical and monetary) while waiting for their court appearance.

Families with small children should get first court appearance (out of this group) with husband/wife couples next. Then brother/sister, brother/brother, each type of family grouping, would come next as the courts clear.

If there are any unaccompanied children in the caravan, they are placed in foster homes after any medical problems are taken care of.

Speaking of which, upon arrival at the camps a military induction style medical exam should be given each person. Eye, ear, nose, and throat, bend over and smile, turn head and cough, urine-blood-stool samples, teeth, joints and bones, heart health, should all be done. Any one with a communicable disease is isolated
and treated.

Anyone who has had problems with law enforcement, been previously deported, gives false information on the asylum papers, will face immediate deportation. They will need to be loaded onto a military C-130, handcuffed with chains locked into the air frame, flown to an airport of their home country, and turned over to the local authorities.

Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.



Jerry you need to run for Congress, you got some great answers!

Stefan Molyneaux pointed out that an asylum seeker must seek asylum in the first country whose border they cross that is a safe place. Mexico is safe in most places, therefore THEY should be the ones dealing with them, you get to trounce thru many countries till you find one you like the best.

Could a bunch of poor Americans go to Canada and demand they take us in and feed, clothe, house and give us free medical care and college educations?

I am also reminded of a plan from long ago to make Canada, the US and Mexico one united country called the NORTH AMERICAN UNION. Remember that? Is somebody still pushing for that plan?


Gina, the ideas aren't mine, except for the modern updates. They were policies used on Ellis island on the east coast and Angel island on the west coast (Hence the question about US history). The main difference is that those who docked there had already applied for travel visas.

The North American Union was a proposal for an European Union set-up for the North American countries. That would tie our economy with Mexico and Canada, including monetary values. I don't think we want the dollar to be chained to the Mexican Peso.


Jerry - 11/2/2018 at 01:04 AM

quote:
[quote[No, you didn't.


You are right. You never answered the question. My bad.


On that point you are correct.
I asked "What in my post would make you think that".
Since you can't answer that question with anything I posted, then I have to believe that you just trolled to see what reaction you would get.
Since with the constant non-answer/no post, I have to think that you just didn't comprehend what I posted.

Go back, reread the post and let me know what you see that gives you reason to believe that I am unsettled by the news.


adhill58 - 11/2/2018 at 01:58 AM

quote:
quote:
The tax burden argument is difficult when you think of how much money actually goes through the federal budget.

When the recent hurricane hit Florida, the Air Force had to leave 17 stealth fighter jets in the hangar because they were non-operational because software had not been installed. It was a priority to get back to check on the damage because EACH of those planes cost the taxpayers $150,000,000.

By my reasoning, we could give 7,000 of our most desperate neighbors about $21,000 each ($150,000,000 total). That would go a long way to making a better life for their families in Honduras or Guatemala.

We would still have 16 non-operational jets at the base in Florida, and nobody's taxes would change.


Using that reasoning, I would love to have $21,000 as would my friends and family. or better yet, a Homeless VETERAN....I mean "what the hell"? right?..it all just gets eaten up by the Taxpayer, right?

Or, what about the next group of 7,000 and the next and the 7,000 who follow?


I am just trying to give perspective, that's all. I just never hear people who complain about the tax burden saying anything about fighter jets and aircraft carriers. The Defense Department and their contractors bleed us all... period. However, helping people in need is a bridge too far.

I am just saying the money is there if we would only use it to fix the problems, domestic or foreign.


BIGV - 11/2/2018 at 02:04 AM

quote:
However, helping people in need is a bridge too far.


Not at all, let's start by helping the VETERANS who put on a uniform and fought for the FLAG. NO VETERAN should be Homeless. The Hell with people who CHOOSE to Break the law and enter this country Illegally all while waving the flags of their homeland.

Immigration enforcement, then reform.


BoytonBrother - 11/2/2018 at 02:29 AM

quote:
Since with the constant non-answer/no post, I have to think that you just didn't comprehend what I posted.


Whatever makes you feel better. I simply believe that if someone doesn’t show me the courtesy of answering me, then he doesn’t deserve that courtesy from me in return.....especially when you solicited for feedback! Please.

quote:
Go back, reread the post and let me know what you see that gives you reason to believe that I am unsettled by the news.


No thanks. I’m about to go watch a few episodes of Cheers.


Jerry - 11/2/2018 at 03:38 AM

quote:
quote:
Since with the constant non-answer/no post, I have to think that you just didn't comprehend what I posted.


Whatever makes you feel better. I simply believe that if someone doesn’t show me the courtesy of answering me, then he doesn’t deserve that courtesy from me in return.....especially when you solicited for feedback! Please.

quote:
Go back, reread the post and let me know what you see that gives you reason to believe that I am unsettled by the news.


No thanks. I’m about to go watch a few episodes of Cheers.


If you had given feedback about the post, you would have gotten comments about your feedback.
You asked "Sounds like you are bit unsettled by this news, would that be accurate?"
I responded with a question "What is in my post that would make you think that?"
So, why would you think I'm unsettled by the news?
You were either trolling for a response that I didn't give you, or you have no reading comprehension.

Hope you enjoy Cheers, and might as well enjoy a few cold ones while watching.


adhill58 - 11/2/2018 at 01:19 PM

quote:
quote:
However, helping people in need is a bridge too far.


Not at all, let's start by helping the VETERANS who put on a uniform and fought for the FLAG. NO VETERAN should be Homeless. The Hell with people who CHOOSE to Break the law and enter this country Illegally all while waving the flags of their homeland.

Immigration enforcement, then reform.


I absolutely agree that no American veteran should be homeless.

I also think that if we really wanted a solution to an immigration crisis, we could work with our poorest neighbors to figure out ways for people to not feel like they have no choice other than leaving their homes.

Think of the number of vets we could help with the $17,500,000,000 we just spent on the new USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier. When that ship goes into service in 2020, we will have 11 active aircraft carriers. Russia and China each have one active and one or two under construction. We could fix a lot of problems and still have way more defense capabilities than any other nation.

Like I said earlier, just trying to give perspective... There are unimaginable amounts of money in the federal budget, but the defense contractors get their half and everybody else gets to bitch about the rest. Pick a problem - immigration, veteran services, infrastructure, public education - we have the money to fix it. It just seems like the collective will to help others is hard to muster.


BoytonBrother - 11/2/2018 at 01:44 PM

If Trump gets $20billion, he’s going to buy a wall instead of help Veterans.


BIGV - 11/2/2018 at 03:19 PM

quote:
I absolutely agree that no American veteran should be homeless.


This is a good starting point in terms of prioritizing.

quote:
I also think that if we really wanted a solution to an immigration crisis, we could work with our poorest neighbors to figure out ways for people to not feel like they have no choice other than leaving their homes.


Why is this our responsibility? There are so many issues here in this Country that need attention. So many scenarios that that deserve our resources, the focus of our brightest minds.

Good fences make good neighbors.


MartinD28 - 11/2/2018 at 04:44 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
However, helping people in need is a bridge too far.


Not at all, let's start by helping the VETERANS who put on a uniform and fought for the FLAG. NO VETERAN should be Homeless. The Hell with people who CHOOSE to Break the law and enter this country Illegally all while waving the flags of their homeland.

Immigration enforcement, then reform.


I absolutely agree that no American veteran should be homeless.

I also think that if we really wanted a solution to an immigration crisis, we could work with our poorest neighbors to figure out ways for people to not feel like they have no choice other than leaving their homes.

Think of the number of vets we could help with the $17,500,000,000 we just spent on the new USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier. When that ship goes into service in 2020, we will have 11 active aircraft carriers. Russia and China each have one active and one or two under construction. We could fix a lot of problems and still have way more defense capabilities than any other nation.

Like I said earlier, just trying to give perspective... There are unimaginable amounts of money in the federal budget, but the defense contractors get their half and everybody else gets to bitch about the rest. Pick a problem - immigration, veteran services, infrastructure, public education - we have the money to fix it. It just seems like the collective will to help others is hard to muster.


Agree.

A strong military is critical to protect us and deter hostile countries (some including those run by dictators who are now Trump's BFF's) who could present military danger to us. Also a strong military is part of us being seen as protector of the foreign countries we see as our responsibility. Some of this is certainly debatable.

The issue is how much $ should be allocated to the military. When does enough become enough? When is there no more additional value added. I've read enough about purchases and production of military assets not needed or asked for, but "for some reasons", ended up becoming reality. Some of this is for economic reasons to add jobs to (example - shipyards).

When would a proportion of the excess military resources be given to other programs for the greater good of our people in need and for programs that are seen as scapegoats for deficits?


BIGV - 11/2/2018 at 04:51 PM

quote:
The issue is how much $ should be allocated to the military. When does enough become enough? When is there no more additional value added. I've read enough about purchases and production of military assets not needed or asked for, but "for some reasons", ended up becoming reality. Some of this is for economic reasons to add jobs to (example - shipyards).


Good point, but what does this have to do with crossing the border Illegally?


MartinD28 - 11/2/2018 at 06:10 PM

quote:
quote:
The issue is how much $ should be allocated to the military. When does enough become enough? When is there no more additional value added. I've read enough about purchases and production of military assets not needed or asked for, but "for some reasons", ended up becoming reality. Some of this is for economic reasons to add jobs to (example - shipyards).


Good point, but what does this have to do with crossing the border Illegally?


Oh probably nothing directly. I was merely following up on what I thought was a very good post & some of the points he raised.

But you probably knew that, right?


BIGV - 11/2/2018 at 08:14 PM

quote:
But you probably knew that, right?


Well....ok, I did.


adhill58 - 11/2/2018 at 08:16 PM

quote:
quote:
I absolutely agree that no American veteran should be homeless.


This is a good starting point in terms of prioritizing.

quote:
I also think that if we really wanted a solution to an immigration crisis, we could work with our poorest neighbors to figure out ways for people to not feel like they have no choice other than leaving their homes.


Why is this our responsibility? There are so many issues here in this Country that need attention. So many scenarios that that deserve our resources, the focus of our brightest minds.

Good fences make good neighbors.


One point... becoming a refugee is not illegal or even wrong. It happened to Jesus.

It is NOT our responsibility to take care of people from other countries, but clearly part of this situation is a problem with which we are involved. (I also personally have some questions about how much responsibility we had in those countries by propping up bad governments during the Cold War that have prevented the people from really having any options economically once we lost interest in whether they would ally with the USSR.) We live in an era of unprecedented wealth, and we need a solution to the situation. My question is: Why can we as a nation act like there is unlimited money when it comes to being able to inflict swift military destruction, but we cannot say let's try to fix the humanitarian crisis happening just a few countries away from our border? We are supposed to be the best nation in the history of the world -why not prove it to our neighbors? People do not flee their homes if they have a reason to stay. We could figure out a way to help them if we wanted to do it.

We could also figure out ways to fix most of the problems here in our country as well. However it is difficult when taxes keep getting cut and the military eats up the majority of the budget.


adhill58 - 11/2/2018 at 08:27 PM

This is a separate question:

Some people coming into the US are seeking asylum, some are economic migrants. Some go to ports of entry, some sneak across.

Suppose in 1989 when the American auto industry was performing very poorly, a laid-off factory worker from Detroit decided to sneak across the border and work for cash at a maple syrup farm in Canada. He had exhausted his savings, and was not able to find a job in Michigan where he could make his house payment and feed his family.

Is this guy a criminal, or someone doing what he has to do to get by?


BIGV - 11/2/2018 at 08:37 PM

quote:
We live in an era of unprecedented wealth, and we need a solution to the situation. My question is: Why can we as a nation act like there is unlimited money when it comes to being able to inflict swift military destruction, but we cannot say let's try to fix the humanitarian crisis happening just a few countries away from our border?


"We" have the power and the means to help as Individuals, not as a collective people. It is just not "our" burden. "We" from my point of view is best translated into "what can I do"? Not "we"..Answer - whatever "you" can or want. Your wallet and mine have absolutely nothing in common when it comes to this issue, I feel no obligation at all.


Jerry - 11/3/2018 at 12:33 AM

quote:
We live in an era of unprecedented wealth, and we need a solution to the situation. My question is: Why can we as a nation act like there is unlimited money when it comes to being able to inflict swift military destruction, but we cannot say let's try to fix the humanitarian crisis happening just a few countries away from our border? [Quote]

What would you have us do to fix the "humanitarian crisis". Go in and take over the country? Take over their leadership? Bomb the country to way before the stone age?


[Quote] People do not flee their homes if they have a reason to stay. We could figure out a way to help them if we wanted to do it.[Quote]

Again, what would you like to be done that hasn't been tried over the past 70 years (remember the Banana Republic Wars of the 1920-1940 era)

[Quote]We could also figure out ways to fix most of the problems here in our country as well. However it is difficult when taxes keep getting cut and the military eats up the majority of the budget.[Quote]

Our military budget has actually been going down for 7 years. The big thing is that a lot of that budget is pay
for all the civilian workers on bases and military posts.


BIGV - 11/3/2018 at 01:53 AM

quote:
This is a separate question:

Some people coming into the US are seeking asylum, some are economic migrants. Some go to ports of entry, some sneak across.

Suppose in 1989 when the American auto industry was performing very poorly, a laid-off factory worker from Detroit decided to sneak across the border and work for cash at a maple syrup farm in Canada. He had exhausted his savings, and was not able to find a job in Michigan where he could make his house payment and feed his family.

Is this guy a criminal, or someone doing what he has to do to get by?


I think this would depend on Canada and its law regarding that issue.


gina - 11/3/2018 at 08:41 PM

We should close the border until the legalities of asylum are resolved. Trump has said if the protesters get violent and throw rocks they can be shot (that's what Israel does to the Palestinians who throw rocks at them). This could get out of hand very quickly.


Bhawk - 11/3/2018 at 10:27 PM

quote:
We should close the border until the legalities of asylum are resolved. Trump has said if the protesters get violent and throw rocks they can be shot (that's what Israel does to the Palestinians who throw rocks at them). This could get out of hand very quickly.


The ports of entry can be closed. Closing all of any of our borders is impossible.


emr - 11/4/2018 at 02:23 PM

My dad RIP had two sayings. 1 - "People only talk about sex and money when they don't have enough." And 2 - "People for the most part don't kill each other when there is enough to go around."

Hate to sound apocalyptic but the worlds resources are overtaxed by a wide margin. Dirty water; overfishing; climate change. We are overpopulated by billions.

So here in America people can't afford health care. When our grandparents came into the country c 1900 they were vouched fo (and will pay cashr. Charities paid for housing and health care. There was no Medicare/Medicaid.

I work in health care in an underserved largely immigrant (many undocumented) area. I worry about the ability of my young adult children to find jobs with health care. Despite what the government says there are people who come in the country illegally who have coverage within the month. Especially the children.

I have advocated for 20 years to amend the constitution so that people born here are citizens. It is absolutely insane that someone is entitled to the same benefits for life just cause their mother happened to be in the US during childbirth. And it is not just "happened." Women intentionally come here to get citizenship for their kids; often hoping for chain migration. Wealthy people fly in (and will even pay cash) so that their child has the protection of American citizenship.

Medicare and Social Security are in a death spiral due to underfunding. Health care costs are spiraling. I have a mildly handicapped child who would be set if we had some form of national health care. He works; benefits are tough to come by.

So everyone who thinks racism is at the root of anti-immigration sentiment is not looking at the big picture. You have not seen the big picture concerning the social costs of illegal immigration; especially re health care.


kevdab - 11/4/2018 at 02:36 PM

"__________________________________________________________________________ _____________
My dad RIP had two sayings. 1 - "People only talk about sex and money when they don't have enough." And 2 - "People for the most part don't kill each other when there is enough to go around."

Hate to sound apocalyptic but the worlds resources are overtaxed by a wide margin. Dirty water; overfishing; climate change. We are overpopulated by billions.

So here in America people can't afford health care. When our grandparents came into the country c 1900 they were vouched fo (and will pay cashr. Charities paid for housing and health care. There was no Medicare/Medicaid.

I work in health care in an underserved largely immigrant (many undocumented) area. I worry about the ability of my young adult children to find jobs with health care. Despite what the government says there are people who come in the country illegally who have coverage within the month. Especially the children.

I have advocated for 20 years to amend the constitution so that people born here are citizens. It is absolutely insane that someone is entitled to the same benefits for life just cause their mother happened to be in the US during childbirth. And it is not just "happened." Women intentionally come here to get citizenship for their kids; often hoping for chain migration. Wealthy people fly in (and will even pay cash) so that their child has the protection of American citizenship.

Medicare and Social Security are in a death spiral due to underfunding. Health care costs are spiraling. I have a mildly handicapped child who would be set if we had some form of national health care. He works; benefits are tough to come by.

So everyone who thinks racism is at the root of anti-immigration sentiment is not looking at the big picture. You have not seen the big picture concerning the social costs of illegal immigration; especially re health care."

___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

Agree


BIGV - 11/4/2018 at 02:43 PM

quote:
"____________________________________________________________________ ___________________
My dad RIP had two sayings. 1 - "People only talk about sex and money when they don't have enough." And 2 - "People for the most part don't kill each other when there is enough to go around."

Hate to sound apocalyptic but the worlds resources are overtaxed by a wide margin. Dirty water; overfishing; climate change. We are overpopulated by billions.

So here in America people can't afford health care. When our grandparents came into the country c 1900 they were vouched fo (and will pay cashr. Charities paid for housing and health care. There was no Medicare/Medicaid.

I work in health care in an underserved largely immigrant (many undocumented) area. I worry about the ability of my young adult children to find jobs with health care. Despite what the government says there are people who come in the country illegally who have coverage within the month. Especially the children.

I have advocated for 20 years to amend the constitution so that people born here are citizens. It is absolutely insane that someone is entitled to the same benefits for life just cause their mother happened to be in the US during childbirth. And it is not just "happened." Women intentionally come here to get citizenship for their kids; often hoping for chain migration. Wealthy people fly in (and will even pay cash) so that their child has the protection of American citizenship.

Medicare and Social Security are in a death spiral due to underfunding. Health care costs are spiraling. I have a mildly handicapped child who would be set if we had some form of national health care. He works; benefits are tough to come by.

So everyone who thinks racism is at the root of anti-immigration sentiment is not looking at the big picture. You have not seen the big picture concerning the social costs of illegal immigration; especially re health care."

___________________________________________________________________________ _____________

Agree


X3


BrerRabbit - 11/4/2018 at 03:56 PM

quote:
I work in health care in an underserved largely immigrant (many undocumented) area


Some of their coverage goes in your pocket. at least you are making a decent living off the situation - despite the drawbacks you mentioned.


emr - 11/4/2018 at 08:19 PM

quote:
quote:
I work in health care in an underserved largely immigrant (many undocumented) area


Some of their coverage goes in your pocket. at least you are making a decent living off the situation - despite the drawbacks you mentioned.


Doesn't make it right, and it doesn't include that in an emergency everyone i entitled to care through a hospital. Lots of 3:00AM visits that the providers don't ever get paid for.


BoytonBrother - 11/5/2018 at 01:34 AM

quote:
You have not seen the big picture concerning the social costs of illegal immigration; especially re health care.


As a healthcare professional, you must know these costs pale in comparison to what obesity does to our healthcare system. Our doctors offices and hospitals across the country, in all states and cities, are over-saturated and burdened with obese Americans needing treatment for lifestyle diseases......diseases they wouldn’t have if they had the self control to take care of their bodies. If we’re going to talk about burdening our healthcare system, it begins with obesity.


emr - 11/5/2018 at 02:15 AM

Obesity i a huge problem; but there is no mechanism in our system of healthcare for punishing people for being non compliant. No one can legally be reufused emrgency care at a hospital; so there is no means of punishment.
But these are our citizens

And btw obesity; hypertension; diabetes are rampant in the underclass as well as immigrants. It adds to the costs of caring for them


BIGV - 11/5/2018 at 02:27 AM

quote:
But these are our citizens


Priority #1


BoytonBrother - 11/5/2018 at 02:42 AM

quote:
But these are our citizens[/quote[

I’m just saying that it’s our own citizens’ obesity problem that is by far the largest burden on our healthcare system.


Jerry - 11/5/2018 at 04:08 AM

quote:
quote:
You have not seen the big picture concerning the social costs of illegal immigration; especially re health care.


As a healthcare professional, you must know these costs pale in comparison to what obesity does to our healthcare system. Our doctors offices and hospitals across the country, in all states and cities, are over-saturated and burdened with obese Americans needing treatment for lifestyle diseases......diseases they wouldn’t have if they had the self control to take care of their bodies. If we’re going to talk about burdening our healthcare system, it begins with obesity.


May I ask, what does this have to do with the illegal immigrant caravans?


BoytonBrother - 11/5/2018 at 03:40 PM

quote:
May I ask, what does this have to do with the illegal immigrant caravans?


emr posted the excerpt that I quoted about how the caravan, along with illegal immigration in general, is a risk of burdening our healthcare system, which I point out is true, but far from the largest burden on the system, which is the epidemic of obesity. Worst part about it is that our system can be freed and be a well-oiled machine if people would just take care of themselves.


KCJimmy - 11/5/2018 at 11:31 PM

So if there weren't as many fat white guys we could allow more illegal aliens, many of whom are also fat, don't speak English and are not US citizens?


Jerry - 11/6/2018 at 02:45 PM

quote:
It's very simple. Escort them across the border to camps. In the camps they are interviewed as to what status do they seek.
Do they seek long term asylum of more than 5 years.
Do they seek short term asylum of 2 or less years.
Do they seek to be recognized as a refugee from a conflict.
Do they wish to apply for an immigration visa?
Do they wish to become citizens?

When they declare their intentions, we offer to allow them to remain in the camps until their status is settled, a DNA sample is gathered, and a non-removable GPS bracelet is issued.

After the DNA check shows the subject has no issues through law enforcement, it is then used to determine if the subject really belongs with the family he claimed upon arrival.

No one is released except whole families who have a certified sponsor who is responsible for their behavior(physical and monetary) while waiting for their court appearance.

Families with small children should get first court appearance (out of this group) with husband/wife couples next. Then brother/sister, brother/brother, each type of family grouping, would come next as the courts clear.

If there are any unaccompanied children in the caravan, they are placed in foster homes after any medical problems are taken care of.

Speaking of which, upon arrival at the camps a military induction style medical exam should be given each person. Eye, ear, nose, and throat, bend over and smile, turn head and cough, urine-blood-stool samples, teeth, joints and bones, heart health, should all be done. Any one with a communicable disease is isolated
and treated.

Anyone who has had problems with law enforcement, been previously deported, gives false information on the asylum papers, will face immediate deportation. They will need to be loaded onto a military C-130, handcuffed with chains locked into the air frame, flown to an airport of their home country, and turned over to the local authorities.

Anybody have something they want to add or discuss about on this post feel free to let me know.



So, let's get back to the original topic.

Why do you think the immigration problem is so difficult?


BoytonBrother - 11/6/2018 at 09:22 PM

quote:
So, let's get back to the original topic.

Why do you think the immigration problem is so difficult?


Well, for one, what do you mean by “immigration problem”? Do you mean illegal immigration or immigration in general?

It’s hard to find the right balance I guess. Farmers, businesses, and large corporations all rely on their cheap labor, and we also need the world’s best innovators to choose the U.S. for work. Going too far to the right could compromise that. Going too far left could be a huge financial burden. Finding the perfect middle ground will always be the challenge.


emr - 11/6/2018 at 10:14 PM

quote:
quote:
So, let's get back to the original topic.

Why do you think the immigration problem is so difficult?


Well, for one, what do you mean by “immigration problem”? Do you mean illegal immigration or immigration in general?

It’s hard to find the right balance I guess. Farmers, businesses, and large corporations all rely on their cheap labor, and we also need the world’s best innovators to choose the U.S. for work. Going too far to the right could compromise that. Going too far left could be a huge financial burden. Finding the perfect middle ground will always be the challenge.


The cheap labor isn't so cheap when you factor in the social costs. Restaurants and builders made fortunes hiring illegals. Everyone else pays the bills.


BoytonBrother - 11/7/2018 at 02:04 AM

quote:
Restaurants and builders made fortunes hiring illegals. Everyone else pays the bills.


Which makes me wonder if both sides intentionally keep policies as loose as they are.


Jerry - 11/7/2018 at 02:09 AM

quote:
quote:
So, let's get back to the original topic.

Why do you think the immigration problem is so difficult?


Well, for one, what do you mean by “immigration problem”? Do you mean illegal immigration or immigration in general?

It’s hard to find the right balance I guess. Farmers, businesses, and large corporations all rely on their cheap labor, and we also need the world’s best innovators to choose the U.S. for work. Going too far to the right could compromise that. Going too far left could be a huge financial burden. Finding the perfect middle ground will always be the challenge.


Why don't we go with ILLEGAL immigration. Legal immigrants seem to be able to follow the rules and laws to get here so i don't think they are a problem.


emr - 11/7/2018 at 02:15 AM

quote:
quote:
Restaurants and builders made fortunes hiring illegals. Everyone else pays the bills.


Which makes me wonder if both sides intentionally keep policies as loose as they are.


There is no doubt that this was a bipartisan disaster for 30 years. Everyone wanted cheap labor. Remember when you were a kid and company owners actually performed manual labor rather than bringing along a truckfull of illegals?


BoytonBrother - 11/7/2018 at 02:17 AM

quote:
Why don't we go with ILLEGAL immigration. Legal immigrants seem to be able to follow the rules and laws to get here so i don't think they are a problem.


Same principle. Business owners and farmers, who tend to be Republican, rely on them for cheap labor. The left wants to help them. Both sides have a need to let them in. I think Republicans may be vocal about opposing illegal immigration, but vote the other way to keep the cheap labor flowing for their business owner lobbyists.


adhill58 - 11/7/2018 at 03:43 PM

Why is the punishment of American companies that use undocumented laborers not the real priority? Why don't we make it easier to come in legally to work? These are people willing to work the jobs that are here.

I also don't understand how illegal immigrants bleed government benefits and take jobs a way from "hard-working Americans" at the same time. It is a sad statement about our workforce if it can lose jobs to "lazy immigrants".

Two years ago, I was working in an area where a large agricultural seed supply company operates. They had buses with port-a-potties on trailers hauling crews of workers around to the different fields to harvest by hand so that the product (seed) is not damaged by machinery. It was 95 degrees for a good stretch that year. These guys were sitting in the ditches along the roads to take their lunch breaks. I had a major realization that they were not "stealing" any job that any American would even imagine doing at this point in time. There were no Caucasians or African-Americans in these crews. I have no idea if the men were undocumented or not. I do know that they were doing some seriously hard work in seriously uncomfortable conditions. I also know that the seed company would have to make some drastic changes in order to hire Americans to perform the same functions. These weren't guys coming in to live off of the government dole... they were here to work. I am sure that their wages were a better deal for the company than it was for them.

If the same President can brag about the lowest unemployment rates in 50 years, but claim that illegal immigrants are have wrecked the whole labor market, something doesn't really add up. There are clearly some businesses that benefit from undocumented labor. Usually for Republicans, that is enough to make it okay. It probably wouldn't be such a problem if all of the immigrants were from Norway, right?


BIGV - 11/7/2018 at 04:34 PM

quote:
I also don't understand how illegal immigrants bleed government benefits and take jobs a way from "hard-working Americans" at the same time. It is a sad statement about our workforce if it can lose jobs to "lazy immigrants".


How easily people seem to forget about Americans in unions who have worked hard, followed the rules and paid their dues. Plumbers, Carpenters, Landscapers, Roofers & Contractors, all of whom have their work stolen and prices undercut by people who have not only entered Illegally, but are working w/o licensing. It's not always about "Hard working" people who "only" do jobs Americans will not....


porkchopbob - 11/7/2018 at 04:56 PM

quote:
How easily people seem to forget about Americans in unions who have worked hard, followed the rules and paid their dues. Plumbers, Carpenters, Landscapers, Roofers & Contractors, all of whom have their work stolen and prices undercut by people who have not only entered Illegally, but are working w/o licensing. It's not always about "Hard working" people who "only" do jobs Americans will not....


Wait, wait, since when do Libertarians support unions over the free market? And I don't think adhill58 was referring to illegal immigrant contractors or roofers (you roll the dice with a non-licensed contractor to work on your house, you get what you deserve), he's referring to tomato pickers at the bottom of the work force. My brother works construction, sometimes union sometimes not, and he's not losing jobs to illegal immigrants.


BIGV - 11/7/2018 at 05:01 PM

quote:
quote:
How easily people seem to forget about Americans in unions who have worked hard, followed the rules and paid their dues. Plumbers, Carpenters, Landscapers, Roofers & Contractors, all of whom have their work stolen and prices undercut by people who have not only entered Illegally, but are working w/o licensing. It's not always about "Hard working" people who "only" do jobs Americans will not....


Wait, wait, since when do Libertarians support unions over the free market? And I don't think adhill58 was referring to illegal immigrant contractors or roofers (you roll the dice with a non-licensed contractor to work on your house, you get what you deserve), he's referring to tomato pickers at the bottom of the work force. My brother works construction, sometimes union sometimes not, and he's not losing jobs to illegal immigrants.


I lived in San Diego for 30+ years and now reside in AZ ( where this is rampant). What state does your Brother live in? My opinion is, if you do not live near the U.S./ Mexico border, you have no idea.

And it is not literally all about Unions, it's about U.S. citizens losing work, some of whom who just happen to be in unions.


porkchopbob - 11/7/2018 at 05:19 PM

quote:
I lived in San Diego for 30+ years and now reside in AZ ( where this is rampant). What state does your Brother live in? My opinion is, if you do not live near the U.S./ Mexico border, you have no idea.

And it is not literally all about Unions, it's about U.S. citizens losing work, some of whom who just happen to be in unions.


The data and evidence of "rampant" illegal plumbers and contractors is contrary to your anecdotal opinion. Unskilled labor jobs they are forced to take in the margins of society is a big difference from work otherwise performed by licensed contractor. As for unions, you brought it up.


BoytonBrother - 11/7/2018 at 05:55 PM

I would never in a million years let an unlicensed contractor perform any type of work on my home or business. Seems like that problem can be shut down immediately if people would use that logic.

No matter how we slice and dice it, there’s simply a strong demand for the cheap labor. Both political parties, and their constituents, need and want them. Whether the liberals who want to help, or the conservative farmers and business owners that need their labor. Eliminating this option could wreak havoc on their industries.

Seems like the “problem” then, is how it affects others. As emr points out, the healthcare industry is affected, as are the states that don’t receive any tax revenue from them. I think another “problem” is the group of people that don’t want to be around any foreigners, legal or not, but are forced to accept them since both parties need them here. What a dilemma.


BIGV - 11/7/2018 at 06:07 PM

quote:
quote:
I lived in San Diego for 30+ years and now reside in AZ ( where this is rampant). What state does your Brother live in? My opinion is, if you do not live near the U.S./ Mexico border, you have no idea.

And it is not literally all about Unions, it's about U.S. citizens losing work, some of whom who just happen to be in unions.


The data and evidence of "rampant" illegal plumbers and contractors is contrary to your anecdotal opinion. Unskilled labor jobs they are forced to take in the margins of society is a big difference from work otherwise performed by licensed contractor. As for unions, you brought it up.


Are you defending Illegal immigration?


porkchopbob - 11/7/2018 at 06:17 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
I lived in San Diego for 30+ years and now reside in AZ ( where this is rampant). What state does your Brother live in? My opinion is, if you do not live near the U.S./ Mexico border, you have no idea.

And it is not literally all about Unions, it's about U.S. citizens losing work, some of whom who just happen to be in unions.


The data and evidence of "rampant" illegal plumbers and contractors is contrary to your anecdotal opinion. Unskilled labor jobs they are forced to take in the margins of society is a big difference from work otherwise performed by licensed contractor. As for unions, you brought it up.


Are you defending Illegal immigration?


That is not even close to what I wrote. BIGV, Reigning King of Straw Man Arguments...


BIGV - 11/7/2018 at 06:48 PM

quote:
Are you defending Illegal immigration?


That is not even close to what I wrote. BIGV, Reigning King of Straw Man Arguments...


Simple question.


BIGV - 11/7/2018 at 07:32 PM

www.c-span.org/video/?c4631739/bill-clinton-illegal-immigration

Copy and Paste to Hear President Bill Clinton on Illegal Immigration. Sounds different coming from a Democrat.


porkchopbob - 11/7/2018 at 08:26 PM

Dude, it's incredibly clear I wasn't defending illegal immigrants, just refuting your platitudes about what kinds of jobs they are actually filling. It's bizarre you would jump to that conclusion. You'd save time and energy by responding to what people actually write and say. This is why there is no rational discourse here, no one listens and people just want to grind their axe.

Seriously, read this and stop doing it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man


gina - 11/7/2018 at 09:28 PM

quote:
quote:
We should close the border until the legalities of asylum are resolved. Trump has said if the protesters get violent and throw rocks they can be shot (that's what Israel does to the Palestinians who throw rocks at them). This could get out of hand very quickly.


The ports of entry can be closed. Closing all of any of our borders is impossible.


True but we can close the ports of entry and should.


gina - 11/7/2018 at 09:42 PM

quote:
My dad RIP had two sayings. 1 - "People only talk about sex and money when they don't have enough." And 2 - "People for the most part don't kill each other when there is enough to go around."

Hate to sound apocalyptic but the worlds resources are overtaxed by a wide margin. Dirty water; overfishing; climate change. We are overpopulated by billions.

So here in America people can't afford health care. When our grandparents came into the country c 1900 they were vouched fo (and will pay cashr. Charities paid for housing and health care. There was no Medicare/Medicaid.

I work in health care in an underserved largely immigrant (many undocumented) area. I worry about the ability of my young adult children to find jobs with health care. Despite what the government says there are people who come in the country illegally who have coverage within the month. Especially the children.

I have advocated for 20 years to amend the constitution so that people born here are citizens. It is absolutely insane that someone is entitled to the same benefits for life just cause their mother happened to be in the US during childbirth. And it is not just "happened." Women intentionally come here to get citizenship for their kids; often hoping for chain migration. Wealthy people fly in (and will even pay cash) so that their child has the protection of American citizenship.

Medicare and Social Security are in a death spiral due to underfunding. Health care costs are spiraling. I have a mildly handicapped child who would be set if we had some form of national health care. He works; benefits are tough to come by.

So everyone who thinks racism is at the root of anti-immigration sentiment is not looking at the big picture. You have not seen the big picture concerning the social costs of illegal immigration; especially re health care.



I agree also with the points you brought up. Social Security is in the red because it has been used to cover disability (SSD) and SSI. The SSI has been used to help poor people who need money, and it is used in the welfare system. It was never designed for that AND as you pointed out there are not enough people contributing money INTO the social security system to cover the outflow of money GOING out of it.

In addition to the imbalance of incoming and outgoing funds, more people are older now so they are not working to pay into it and have to start drawing money out of it, so the retirees plus the SSI recipients are draining the fund.

There needs to be a separate fund for SSI funds for poor people to draw money from until there is some other program created with it's own funding source. Maybe the states should fund it with interest from annuities and when recipients reach a certain age where they could normally collect social security but have not worked to be able to qualify for regular social security, pay them out of the annuity that has been created in their individual name. Sort of like a 401K for poor people. Something has to be done, regardless of people saying why should we, why don't they work. The stark reality is there are a lot of poor people who need something. Those on SSI survive on a $6,000 or $7,000 year income from welfare. They get a small amount for rent and then $150 spending money for things they might need. The govt. just threw its hands up with no solution, and started drawing from the social security trust fund and called it SSI benefits.

The states need to take care of their people and each community needs to address their homeless, their poor and their jobless instead of expecting it to come from somewhere else. NY has a huge budget shortfall and so does the county here. They borrow from funds within the budget to try to kick the can down the road, but that is not a solution, just a short stop -gap. and even the federal govt. has only funded programs till Dec. 7th then we can go thru that shut the govt. stuff down again.

Social Security has to be there for the workers who paid into it. If they want to restructure it and create individual government annuities for people maybe they could do that. I am not an economist but everybody knows the current system is not sustainable as it is now.

Yes I agree that birthright citizenship must stop. They can get a birth certificate showing they were born here, but the rest of the benefits should not come like carte blanche. Those born here from women who cross the borders should be able to stay only till they were well enough to travel back to their homeland.

I read last Friday, The Mexicans are providing BUSSES to bus the caravan walkers to Mexico City. They do not want them stuck in their country. Maybe we need to sanction Mexico for doing this. I thought it was the democrats doing it, but it is actually Mexico itself.




[Edited on 11/7/2018 by gina]


gina - 11/8/2018 at 10:05 PM

The Central Americans heading towards for the US border are now demanding busses. AND
they reportedly turned down offers of jobs, medical care, education that Mexico offerred.

FIRST POINT

https://www.onenewsnow.com/ap/world/migrants-in-caravan-demanding-buses-to- us-border

“California is the longest route but is the best border, while Texas is the closest but the worst” border, said Jose Luis Fuentes of the National Lawyers Guild to gathered migrants. Fuentes warned the migrants that if they are separated from their children they should “say they want a lawyer and not sign any paper.”

However, the U.N. human rights agency said its office in Mexico had filed a report with prosecutors in the central state of Puebla about two buses that migrants boarded in the last leg of the trip to Mexico City early this week, and whose whereabouts are not known.

Other activists and officials explained the options available to migrants in Mexico, which has offered them refuge, asylum or work visas. The government said 2,697 temporary visas had been issued to individuals and families to cover them while they wait for the 45-day application process for a more permanent status.

Christopher Gascon, the Mexico representative for the International Organization for Migration, estimated there are perhaps another 4,000 in caravans that are working their way through southern Mexico.

Mexico City authorities say that of the 4,841 registered migrants receiving shelter in a sports complex, 1,726 are under the age of 18, including 310 children under five.


Remarks: What is the International Organization for Migration? Who funds it?


SECOND POINT

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/caravan-mexico-offer/

To qualify for the program, dubbed “Estas en Tu Casa” (“You Are Home”), migrants had to be in Mexico’s southern states of Chiapas or Oaxaca. Many of the migrants did turn down the offer, however, stating their goal was to reach the United States.




[Edited on 11/9/2018 by gina]


gina - 11/9/2018 at 04:36 PM

Trump signs Executive Order Denying Asylum to those trying to enter the country illegally

https://www.yahoo.com/news/us-immigration-officials-move-restrict-asylum-bo rder-055150535--politics.html

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Friday invoked extraordinary national security powers to deny asylum to migrants who enter the country illegally, tightening the border as caravans of Central Americans slowly approach the United States. "The arrival of large numbers ... will contribute to the overloading of our immigration and asylum system and to the release of thousands ... into the interior of the United States," Trump said in the proclamation, calling it a crisis.

"We need people in our country but they have to come in legally and they have to have merit," Trump said Friday as he departed for Paris. The changes are meant to funnel asylum seekers through official border crossings for speedy rulings, officials said, instead of having them try to circumvent such crossings on the nearly 2,000-mile (3,200-kilometer) border.

Administration officials said those denied asylum under the proclamation may be eligible for similar forms of protection if they fear returning to their countries, though they would be subject to a tougher threshold. Those forms of protection include "withholding of removal" — which is similar to asylum, but doesn't allow for green cards or bringing families — or protection under the United Nations Convention Against Torture.

Homeland Security officials said they were adding staffing at the border crossings to manage the expected crush, but it's not clear how migrants, specifically families, would be held as their cases are adjudicated. Family detention centers are largely at capacity. Trump has said he wanted to erect "tent cities," but nothing has been funded or decided.

Omar Jadwat, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Immigrants' Rights Project, said the latest changes were clearly illegal.

"U.S. law specifically allows individuals to apply for asylum whether or not they are at a port of entry. It is illegal to circumvent that by agency or presidential decree," he said.

Trump also suggested he'd revoke the right to citizenship for babies born to non-U.S. citizens on American soil and erect massive "tent cities" to detain migrants. Those issues were not addressed by the regulations. But Trump insisted the citizenship issue would be pushed through.

"We're signing it. We're doing it," he said.

The asylum section of the Immigration and Nationality Act says a migrant is allowed to make a claim up to a year after arriving in the U.S., and it doesn't matter how they arrive — illegally or through a border crossing.
Trump has long said those seeking asylum should come through legal ports of entry. But many migrants are unaware of that guidance, and official border crossings have grown clogged.

In 2017, the U.S. fielded more than 330,000 asylum claims, nearly double the number two years earlier and surpassing Germany as highest in the world.


REMARKS: Change the asylum laws so that people cannot abuse the system. If someone or a small group of people are being persecuted in their own country and need to leave, they should have no problem coming thru a legal port of entry to the US and saying so. For a group of thousands to just say well we want to come there and you cannot stop us cannot be allowed. Since our current asylum law has a loophole saying that people can apply for asylum no matter how they get here (even coming in crossing the border illegally), until that loophole can be closed, well a President's gotta do what a President's gotta do, and invoking his Executive Orders is the way he has to do it right now.

Those who sincerely want a better life can ask the groups that are helping them like the National Lawyers Guild who was the legal mouthpiece for the occupy wall streeters whenever they got arrested, to stop flaunting loopholes in our laws.




2112 - 11/10/2018 at 02:03 AM

quote:
quote:
My dad RIP had two sayings. 1 - "People only talk about sex and money when they don't have enough." And 2 - "People for the most part don't kill each other when there is enough to go around."

Hate to sound apocalyptic but the worlds resources are overtaxed by a wide margin. Dirty water; overfishing; climate change. We are overpopulated by billions.

So here in America people can't afford health care. When our grandparents came into the country c 1900 they were vouched fo (and will pay cashr. Charities paid for housing and health care. There was no Medicare/Medicaid.

I work in health care in an underserved largely immigrant (many undocumented) area. I worry about the ability of my young adult children to find jobs with health care. Despite what the government says there are people who come in the country illegally who have coverage within the month. Especially the children.

I have advocated for 20 years to amend the constitution so that people born here are citizens. It is absolutely insane that someone is entitled to the same benefits for life just cause their mother happened to be in the US during childbirth. And it is not just "happened." Women intentionally come here to get citizenship for their kids; often hoping for chain migration. Wealthy people fly in (and will even pay cash) so that their child has the protection of American citizenship.

Medicare and Social Security are in a death spiral due to underfunding. Health care costs are spiraling. I have a mildly handicapped child who would be set if we had some form of national health care. He works; benefits are tough to come by.

So everyone who thinks racism is at the root of anti-immigration sentiment is not looking at the big picture. You have not seen the big picture concerning the social costs of illegal immigration; especially re health care.



I agree also with the points you brought up. Social Security is in the red because it has been used to cover disability (SSD) and SSI. The SSI has been used to help poor people who need money, and it is used in the welfare system. It was never designed for that AND as you pointed out there are not enough people contributing money INTO the social security system to cover the outflow of money GOING out of it.

In addition to the imbalance of incoming and outgoing funds, more people are older now so they are not working to pay into it and have to start drawing money out of it, so the retirees plus the SSI recipients are draining the fund.

There needs to be a separate fund for SSI funds for poor people to draw money from until there is some other program created with it's own funding source. Maybe the states should fund it with interest from annuities and when recipients reach a certain age where they could normally collect social security but have not worked to be able to qualify for regular social security, pay them out of the annuity that has been created in their individual name. Sort of like a 401K for poor people. Something has to be done, regardless of people saying why should we, why don't they work. The stark reality is there are a lot of poor people who need something. Those on SSI survive on a $6,000 or $7,000 year income from welfare. They get a small amount for rent and then $150 spending money for things they might need. The govt. just threw its hands up with no solution, and started drawing from the social security trust fund and called it SSI benefits.

The states need to take care of their people and each community needs to address their homeless, their poor and their jobless instead of expecting it to come from somewhere else. NY has a huge budget shortfall and so does the county here. They borrow from funds within the budget to try to kick the can down the road, but that is not a solution, just a short stop -gap. and even the federal govt. has only funded programs till Dec. 7th then we can go thru that shut the govt. stuff down again.

Social Security has to be there for the workers who paid into it. If they want to restructure it and create individual government annuities for people maybe they could do that. I am not an economist but everybody knows the current system is not sustainable as it is now.

Yes I agree that birthright citizenship must stop. They can get a birth certificate showing they were born here, but the rest of the benefits should not come like carte blanche. Those born here from women who cross the borders should be able to stay only till they were well enough to travel back to their homeland.

I read last Friday, The Mexicans are providing BUSSES to bus the caravan walkers to Mexico City. They do not want them stuck in their country. Maybe we need to sanction Mexico for doing this. I thought it was the democrats doing it, but it is actually Mexico itself.

[Edited on 11/7/2018 by gina]


Why would the Democrats be involved? They have nothing to gain. This caravan has been a gift to the Republicans who have an issue to rally around and Fox News who have their biggest story. They have the most to gain.


gina - 11/14/2018 at 12:43 AM

The Democrats want to help them get registered to vote, and while they cannot be registered to vote in national elections, I read recently that some undocumented persons were able to vote in their local elections on school district matters. The whole thing is just out of hand. They should either come in legally at the official border crossings and request asylum or they should be sent back to the country they came in from.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/the-migrant-caravan-has-arrived-heres- what-you-need-to-know/ar-BBPFIn3


Riding on nine buses, with a Honduran flag flying out the window of one of them, the group arrived in Tijuana after a month-long journey that saw them traverse multiple countries while enduring oppressive heat, torrential rains and exhausting days-long walks.

The biggest portion of the caravan, however, is still more than 1,000 miles away. After arriving in Mexico City last week, the group has begun splintering, with some members tired of the slow pace and picking up rides wherever they can.

That larger group expected to speed through two Mexican states on Tuesday but said the government of Jalisco state cut short their promised bus rides, leaving them stranded in a rural part of the state more than 50 miles from their next stop.

By arriving in Tijuana, the group will likely try to approach the San Ysidro Port of Entry just south of San Diego.

That's the largest crossing along the U.S.-Mexico border, processing more than 100,000 people a day. Port officials recently completed a multi-year, $750 million upgrade, expanding the facility to 22 pedestrian lanes and 26 vehicle lanes.

But during a recent tour, Port Director Sidney Aki said the facility can process only about 100 asylum seekers per day, leaving migrants in Tijuana regularly waiting for weeks for their chance to request asylum.

Under new rules published by the departments of Justice and Homeland Security, combined with the proclamation signed by Trump, foreigners will still be allowed to request asylum if they present themselves at ports of entry. But the presidential directive forbids those who enter illegally from doing the same.


OriginalGoober - 11/14/2018 at 01:41 AM

quote:
I would never in a million years let an unlicensed contractor perform any type of work on my home or business. What a dilemma.


Are you capable of changing a tire, replacing a brake line, installing a window or cleaning your chimney?


2112 - 11/14/2018 at 07:02 AM

quote:
The Democrats want to help them get registered to vote, and while they cannot be registered to vote in national elections, I read recently that some undocumented persons were able to vote in their local elections on school district matters. The whole thing is just out of hand.


Yes, San Francisco passed a law allowing undocumented residents to vote in school board elections. They are not allowed to vote in state or any other elections. A total of 42 undocumented residents registered under this plan. Whether or not you believe this is right or wrong, do you really think this is a big important thing for Democrats? I would be surprised if more than 1% of Democrats care about this one way or another. Think about this - in San Francisco almost everybody on the ballet is a Democrat. Allowing 42 additional undocumented residents to vote isn't going to get a single additional Democrat elected.

Again, Democrats have nothing to gain from this caravan. Only the Republicans do by making it a wedge issue. Have you noticed that coverage of this caravan has slowed dramatically since the election, and now the caravan appears to even be breaking up? Coincidence?


gina - 11/16/2018 at 09:57 PM

The US seems to have a bunch of Haitian and other people leaving to go TO Canada. What are they giving them that the US does not?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/15/americas/canada-us-asylum-trnd/index.html



[Edited on 11/16/2018 by gina]


gina - 11/16/2018 at 10:50 PM



http://revolutionradio.org/2018/11/16/why-the-new-world-order-wants-mass-mi gration-into-the-west/


Muleman1994 - 11/18/2018 at 07:57 PM

Mexican citizens want them out of their city:

Migrant caravan faces opposition from angry Tijuana residents
https://www.foxnews.com/world/angry-tijuana-residents-clash-with-migrant-ca ravan

Migrants get cool reception in Mexican border town
https://www.apnews.com/cecfafdd898b478b81afb20a1e4f4279


Apparently they don't like the free food either.

Maybe the old adage is true. If you have eaten food from a food truck in Tijuana, you have eaten horse meat.



BrerRabbit - 11/18/2018 at 09:08 PM

quote:
Maybe the old adage is true. If you have eaten food from a food truck in Tijuana, you have eaten horse meat.


I have eaten horse meat, in England, Mexico and Asia, it is excellent - leaner and cleaner than grain-fed beef, comparable to expensive grass-fed beef, good enough to eat raw, though a dip of soy sauce helps. Specialty horse meat is just as expensive as specialty beef.

If you eat baloney or hot dogs you don't mind eating ground up whatever from the processing plant, could be anything, pig's feet, linoleum sweepings, a bored worker's cigarette butts, a hapless rat.

I'll take honest clean horse over mystery Hormel any day!

Horse vs. Beef:

https://www.healthambition.com/horse-meat-vs-beef


In one of the bigger food related stories of early 2013, it was reported that horse meat was found in processed meat products labelled as beef in Irish and British supermarkets. In some cases, the amount of horse meat substituted for beef was as much as 100%.

The ethics of horse meat consumption is a personal matter. And though it’s definitely one you should have a choice in, if you choose to eat cheap processed ‘meat’, it could be argued that you’re not really that concerned with what you’re eating anyway. You’ll see why ahead.


The Nutritional Value of Horse Meat vs Beef

Calories
According to nutritional data, 100 grams of cooked horse meat contains 175 calories, with 55 of those calories coming from fat.

By comparison, 100 grams of standard ground beef with 30% fat has 273 calories with 164 of those coming from fat.

While you may be able to find processed beef products with less than 30% fat, unless they are specifically labelled (and we’ve seen just how well that works) the fat percentage can be even higher.

Fat Content
Horse meat is listed to be containing only 6 grams of fat per hundred grams, 2 grams of saturated fat and 64 mg of cholesterol. It’s not surprising, with most horses eating more grass than processed grain pellets, that their meat would be relatively low-fat.

Ground beef is listed as having 18 grams of fat in total, with 7 grams of saturated fat and 1 gram of trans fat. Total cholesterol is 82 mg.

Intensive cattle production uses lots of fattening grain pellets as the primary feed and often synthetic hormones to speed up the animal’s weight gain.Cattle fed grain as their main diet will always be much higher in fat compared to those that are grass fed.

Protein
The protein content of horse meat is around 28 grams per 100 grams, making this a high protein food.

Ground beef is comparable, though a little lower, with 25 grams per 100 gram serving.

Vitamins and Minerals
The levels of certain vitamins and mineral in horse meat are quite high. It is a particularly rich source of iron and it also has good amounts of the minerals zinc, selenium and phosphorus and of the B vitamins niacin, B6 and B12.

Ground beef is also considered a good source of iron, though it is significantly lower than horse meat, with less than half the content. Zinc and selenium are higher in ground beef though and it also contains a good concentration of most of the B vitamins.

Should You Eat Horse?
While at truly insignificant levels compared to beef consumption, horse meat is eaten in many European countries like France, Germany and Italy. In specialty butchers across Europe you can find meat from horses sold alongside other more commonly known animal foods.

So should you eat horse meat? If you don’t personally have any moral objections to eating horse and you can find it humanely slaughtered in one of these specialty butchers, then I think the nutritional inoformation on horse meat above has shown it is actually healthier than regular beef.



[Edited on 11/18/2018 by BrerRabbit]


Muleman1994 - 11/18/2018 at 09:48 PM

While you have a Trigger Taco in hand you might want to go somewhere else.
The Tijuana folks are starting to fight with the invaders.


BrerRabbit - 11/18/2018 at 10:36 PM

You will have to come up with something other than horse meat to tell us all how you think Mexicans are inferior.


Muleman1994 - 11/18/2018 at 11:16 PM

quote:
You will have to come up with something other than horse meat to tell us all how you think Mexicans areinferior.




I never said I think Mexicans are inferior.
That is your lie.

Apparently the Mexicans do not want the invaders in Tijuana.
If the Mexican's don't want them in their city I'm sure California will be just thrilled.


BrerRabbit - 11/18/2018 at 11:29 PM

quote:
I never said I think Mexicans are inferior.


True, you never come right out and say it.


2112 - 11/19/2018 at 06:21 AM

Having traveled extensively and talked to people all over the world, the one thing universal is blaming someone who has less than you for all of your problems. If you go to the Dominican Republic they like to blame their problems on the Haitians. Go to Puerto Rico and they like to blame their problems on the Dominicans. Go to parts of New York and they like to blame the Puerto Ricans. And on and on it goes. So right now Americans blame the Mexicans who blame the Hondurans who blame the El Salvadorans. Notice nobody blames those who have more than them for taking advantage of their labor, it's always blaming those with less because you look down on them.


BrerRabbit - 11/19/2018 at 07:10 AM

Hey lets hire the invaders under the table for dogcrap wages to build the wall

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NDA4B_pHh5w

[Edited on 11/19/2018 by BrerRabbit]


sckeys - 11/19/2018 at 01:57 PM

quote:
Having traveled extensively and talked to people all over the world, the one thing universal is blaming someone who has less than you for all of your problems. If you go to the Dominican Republic they like to blame their problems on the Haitians. Go to Puerto Rico and they like to blame their problems on the Dominicans. Go to parts of New York and they like to blame the Puerto Ricans. And on and on it goes. So right now Americans blame the Mexicans who blame the Hondurans who blame the El Salvadorans. Notice nobody blames those who have more than them for taking advantage of their labor, it's always blaming those with less because you look down on them.


Very well stated. It’s the same in our own communities.


BIGV - 11/19/2018 at 03:42 PM

quote:
quote:
Having traveled extensively and talked to people all over the world, the one thing universal is blaming someone who has less than you for all of your problems. If you go to the Dominican Republic they like to blame their problems on the Haitians. Go to Puerto Rico and they like to blame their problems on the Dominicans. Go to parts of New York and they like to blame the Puerto Ricans. And on and on it goes. So right now Americans blame the Mexicans who blame the Hondurans who blame the El Salvadorans. Notice nobody blames those who have more than them for taking advantage of their labor, it's always blaming those with less because you look down on them.


Very well stated. It’s the same in our own communities.


Disagree. It is not about "Blaming". It is about calling out people who choose to cross the border ILLEGALLY for what ever reason. It is about about the financial burden they place on Hospitals & Schools. It is about People voting who are NOT citizens, being given Driver's Licences when they do not deserve them. Please don't tell me the only price to pay is "Pennies on the dollar" be cause if that is true, then sign me up, I too would love to have all of these things for just pennies on the dollar. Think they are just looking for work? Think they just need a hand?...YOU help them. YOU hire them. But do not pattempt to place that guilt on the rest of us.


Muleman1994 - 11/19/2018 at 03:46 PM

The horde really need to hire a new PR firm. Even the corrupt liberal media is reporting that the Tijuana citizens want them out:


'Out! Out!' Tijuana Protesters Call for Migrant Caravan to Leave
http://time.com/5458448/tijuana-protest-migrant-caravan-u-s-border/

Violence breaks out as first wave of migrant caravan arrives in Tijuana, Mexico
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/11/15/migrant-caravan-viole nce-erupts-migrants-pack-into-tijuana-mexico/2015599002/

Protesters in Tijuana, Mexico, want migrant caravan to leave
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/protesters-tijuana-mexico-want-migrant-c aravan-leave-n937761


BoytonBrother - 11/19/2018 at 04:57 PM

There are four parts to this equation: the illegal immigrants, the United States government, American workers, and American business owners. The illegals could stop coming here illegally. The US government could do more to stop them. American business owners and farmers could stop hiring them. Americans who are unemployed could fill those field jobs. To only focus on the illegals is as cowardly as it gets.


BrerRabbit - 11/19/2018 at 05:15 PM

Not to mention the global corporations that destroy local economies worldwide and displace the entire population of the planet.


MartinD28 - 11/19/2018 at 05:28 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Having traveled extensively and talked to people all over the world, the one thing universal is blaming someone who has less than you for all of your problems. If you go to the Dominican Republic they like to blame their problems on the Haitians. Go to Puerto Rico and they like to blame their problems on the Dominicans. Go to parts of New York and they like to blame the Puerto Ricans. And on and on it goes. So right now Americans blame the Mexicans who blame the Hondurans who blame the El Salvadorans. Notice nobody blames those who have more than them for taking advantage of their labor, it's always blaming those with less because you look down on them.


Very well stated. It’s the same in our own communities.


Disagree. It is not about "Blaming". It is about calling out people who choose to cross the border ILLEGALLY for what ever reason. It is about about the financial burden they place on Hospitals & Schools. It is about People voting who are NOT citizens, being given Driver's Licences when they do not deserve them. Please don't tell me the only price to pay is "Pennies on the dollar" be cause if that is true, then sign me up, I too would love to have all of these things for just pennies on the dollar. Think they are just looking for work? Think they just need a hand?...YOU help them. YOU hire them. But do not pattempt to place that guilt on the rest of us.


Are these the same people that Trump says go to their cars, change their shirts, and then go vote a second time? Pretty cool - not only are they voting illegally but are doing it twice. That's quite an accomplishment.


BIGV - 11/19/2018 at 06:17 PM

quote:
Are these the same people that Trump says go to their cars, change their shirts, and then go vote a second time? Pretty cool - not only are they voting illegally but are doing it twice. That's quite an accomplishment.


You tell me because I have no idea. But I will share this with you. I now live in Sedona, AZ where I just voted in the National election. I walked into my Polling station and informed the official present that the address on my License was not "up to date" with my new address... (I had on a prior visit to the DMV in Cottonwood given that info to the clerk who in turn entered that info into the State's database all while assuring me that would be sufficient). At the Polling place they let me Vote but told me my Vote was "Provisional" until my change of address could be verified. All necessary because I was honest.

Quite a contrast to California where I lived for the better part of 40 years... NO I.D. is necessary to Vote because that is deemed "Unfair" to those who "can not" provide it.

Now, you tell me where the possibility of voting twice or more, is more prevalent?


BIGV - 11/19/2018 at 06:29 PM

quote:
The illegals could stop coming here illegally.


Not until Mexico steps up and begins to take care of its own, they have the resources

quote:
The US government could do more to stop them
.

Build the wall

quote:
American business owners and farmers could stop hiring them.


We are in agreement here, they should be fined heavily when caught.

quote:
Americans who are unemployed could fill those field jobs.


Is not the argument of the Democratic Party " A livable minimum wage"? The other argument is "These are jobs no one wants"...You can't have it both ways.

quote:
To only focus on the illegals is as cowardly as it gets.


Not the "Focus" but I ask. "Are they breaking the Law by entering Illegally"?..Ahh but the usual retort, "Are you perfect?...Do you break Laws"?

And I would answer... "Is owning a Gun without a License, Illegal"?


MartinD28 - 11/19/2018 at 07:26 PM

quote:
quote:
Are these the same people that Trump says go to their cars, change their shirts, and then go vote a second time? Pretty cool - not only are they voting illegally but are doing it twice. That's quite an accomplishment.


You tell me because I have no idea. But I will share this with you. I now live in Sedona, AZ where I just voted in the National election. I walked into my Polling station and informed the official present that the address on my License was not "up to date" with my new address... (I had on a prior visit to the DMV in Cottonwood given that info to the clerk who in turn entered that info into the State's database all while assuring me that would be sufficient). At the Polling place they let me Vote but told me my Vote was "Provisional" until my change of address could be verified. All necessary because I was honest.

Quite a contrast to California where I lived for the better part of 40 years... NO I.D. is necessary to Vote because that is deemed "Unfair" to those who "can not" provide it.

Now, you tell me where the possibility of voting twice or more, is more prevalent?


Ah...that makes perfectly good sense. That would be the answer to Trump's claim of millions of illegal votes and why the "much loved and adored HC on this site" won the popular vote. The interesting thing is that voter suppression guy (Kris Kobach) appointed by Trump to head the voter fraud commission for some reason couldn't find all the illegal votes. I mean the guy's a pro - spent a career doing this until the commission was decommissioned & he lost the recent election in Kansas to become governor. If Kris can't find find those votes, nobody can.


2112 - 11/19/2018 at 08:28 PM

quote:
quote:
Are these the same people that Trump says go to their cars, change their shirts, and then go vote a second time? Pretty cool - not only are they voting illegally but are doing it twice. That's quite an accomplishment.


You tell me because I have no idea. But I will share this with you. I now live in Sedona, AZ where I just voted in the National election. I walked into my Polling station and informed the official present that the address on my License was not "up to date" with my new address... (I had on a prior visit to the DMV in Cottonwood given that info to the clerk who in turn entered that info into the State's database all while assuring me that would be sufficient). At the Polling place they let me Vote but told me my Vote was "Provisional" until my change of address could be verified. All necessary because I was honest.

Quite a contrast to California where I lived for the better part of 40 years... NO I.D. is necessary to Vote because that is deemed "Unfair" to those who "can not" provide it.

Now, you tell me where the possibility of voting twice or more, is more prevalent?


In California, you have to sign to get your ballot, and they check the signature just like they do mail in ballots. Some fraud I'm sure happens, but it certainly doesn't seem to be widespread.

Funny how checking signatures to prevent fraud takes time, but when there is a close election Trump and his fans like to cry fraud and want to go with the election day vote, before signatures are checked. Fraud isn't what concerns Republicans, only counting the votes that benefit them does.


MartinD28 - 11/19/2018 at 09:23 PM

In California, the Dems picked off a number of seats and including Republican stronghold, Orange County thanks to Mr. Trump.

Thank you, Donald. Just keep doing what you're doing, and in 2020 America truly will be great again thanks to all your winning.


BIGV - 11/19/2018 at 09:41 PM

quote:
In California, you have to sign to get your ballot, and they check the signature just like they do mail in ballots


Incorrect. Your signature is required only when you register to Vote and or on-line. On Voting day, you can walk into a Polling station and point to "your" name and yes, you may simply make a mark next to said name.

quote:
That would be the answer to Trump's claim of millions of illegal votes and why the "much loved and adored HC on this site" won the popular vote.


She certainly won in California.


2112 - 11/19/2018 at 10:21 PM

quote:
quote:
In California, you have to sign to get your ballot, and they check the signature just like they do mail in ballots


Incorrect. Your signature is required only when you register to Vote and or on-line. On Voting day, you can walk into a Polling station and point to "your" name and yes, you may simply make a mark next to said name.



I've had to sign the book next to my name each and every time I've voted for the last 30+ years in California, and that includes 3 different counties. My wife is a permanent mail in voter and where her name is in the book it says "mail in voter" where she would have to sign. Not sure which county you tried to vote in California, but if you didn't sign the book your vote might not have been counted.


MartinD28 - 11/19/2018 at 10:58 PM

quote:
quote:
In California, you have to sign to get your ballot, and they check the signature just like they do mail in ballots


Incorrect. Your signature is required only when you register to Vote and or on-line. On Voting day, you can walk into a Polling station and point to "your" name and yes, you may simply make a mark next to said name.

quote:
That would be the answer to Trump's claim of millions of illegal votes and why the "much loved and adored HC on this site" won the popular vote.


She certainly won in California.


Actually she won the popular vote in the United States. In spite of winning the electoral college, that is something that Trump still resents & attempts to attribute to fraud and illegals...without any proof to support his swollen ego. He sure does make a lot of claims that are factually proven to be false.


2112 - 11/20/2018 at 12:09 AM

5,800 troops that Trump rushed to the border just ahead of the election in response to the caravan are now heading home, just as the caravan is expected to arrive.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/19/troops-us-mexico-border-come-home -1005510


MartinD28 - 11/20/2018 at 12:37 AM

quote:
5,800 troops that Trump rushed to the border just ahead of the election in response to the caravan are now heading home, just as the caravan is expected to arrive.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/19/troops-us-mexico-border-come-home -1005510



What a waste of taxpayer money he orchestrated all for show.

He pulls stunts to lure the base. They can't see through his facade. Thick or thin they'll be with him. In the end, he'll lose, and they'll be trying to figure out why.


2112 - 11/20/2018 at 12:43 AM

quote:
quote:
5,800 troops that Trump rushed to the border just ahead of the election in response to the caravan are now heading home, just as the caravan is expected to arrive.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/19/troops-us-mexico-border-come-home -1005510



What a waste of taxpayer money he orchestrated all for show.

He pulls stunts to lure the base. They can't see through his facade. Thick or thin they'll be with him. In the end, he'll lose, and they'll be trying to figure out why.


I'm sure The Cult of Trump members will be along soon to defend this.


BIGV - 11/20/2018 at 12:57 AM

quote:
Actually she won the popular vote in the United States.


Not without California


BrerRabbit - 11/20/2018 at 01:04 AM

quote:
I'm sure The Cult of Trump members will be along soon to defend this.


It is truly weird how they react to criticism of Trump as if they are extensions of the Master's Will and it is criticism of themselves. Saw a recent poster here bellyaching how folks think he is a POS if he likes the prez. Strange how they identify so completely with their idol. Creepsville.





2112 - 11/20/2018 at 01:27 AM

quote:
quote:
Actually she won the popular vote in the United States.


Not without California


Last I checked California was part of the USA. Since California provides significant more tax revenue to the fedeal government then it gets back, it seems only fair the California should get a say in the election as well. After all, California already get's the smallest per capita representation in the senate than any other state. The Electoral College is already unfair to the high population states. Seems like we should award electoral votes based on tax contribution to the US coffers. Seems that would be a Republican thing to do.


BIGV - 11/20/2018 at 02:55 AM

quote:
The Electoral College is already unfair to the high population states.


Unfair? Are you kidding?...That was the whole idea; small population states would have very little representation otherwise.


2112 - 11/20/2018 at 03:10 AM

quote:
quote:
The Electoral College is already unfair to the high population states.


Unfair? Are you kidding?...That was the whole idea; small population states would have very little representation otherwise.


Yes, I understand that was a compromise when they wrote the constitution, but as it is a California's population is greater than the population of the 21 least populous states combined. So California gets 2 senators and the 21 least populous states get 42 senators. That is quite a underrepresentation in the senate for California.


BIGV - 11/20/2018 at 03:19 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
The Electoral College is already unfair to the high population states.


Unfair? Are you kidding?...That was the whole idea; small population states would have very little representation otherwise.


Yes, I understand that was a compromise when they wrote the constitution, but as it is a California's population is greater than the population of the 21 least populous states combined. So California gets 2 senators and the 21 least populous states get 42 senators. That is quite a underrepresentation in the senate for California.


After living there for the better part of my life, I am elated that politics in California does not dictate what happens in the rest of the Union.


2112 - 11/20/2018 at 03:31 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The Electoral College is already unfair to the high population states.


Unfair? Are you kidding?...That was the whole idea; small population states would have very little representation otherwise.


Yes, I understand that was a compromise when they wrote the constitution, but as it is a California's population is greater than the population of the 21 least populous states combined. So California gets 2 senators and the 21 least populous states get 42 senators. That is quite a underrepresentation in the senate for California.


After living there for the better part of my life, I am elated that politics in California does not dictate what happens in the rest of the Union.


Sorry you don't appreciate democracy. Don't worry, it seems like we are getting closer to totalitarian rule all the time.


2112 - 11/20/2018 at 03:32 AM

quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
The Electoral College is already unfair to the high population states.


Unfair? Are you kidding?...That was the whole idea; small population states would have very little representation otherwise.


Yes, I understand that was a compromise when they wrote the constitution, but as it is a California's population is greater than the population of the 21 least populous states combined. So California gets 2 senators and the 21 least populous states get 42 senators. That is quite a underrepresentation in the senate for California.


After living there for the better part of my life, I am elated that politics in California does not dictate what happens in the rest of the Union.


Sorry you don't appreciate democracy. Don't worry, it seems like we are getting closer to totalitarian rule all the time.


BIGV - 11/20/2018 at 03:41 AM

quote:
Sorry you don't appreciate democracy


Not applicable, of course I do. One State should not dictate policy, ever.


2112 - 11/20/2018 at 03:51 AM

quote:
quote:
Sorry you don't appreciate democracy


Not applicable, of course I do. One State should not dictate policy, ever.


Of course not, but if "All Men are Created Equal," then every citizen should have equal representation. You may be happy that each citizen of Wyoming gets a greater say as to who is president or who sits on the Supreme Court than a citizen of NY or CA, but that goes against one of the founding principles of this nation. And when the constitution was ratified we didn't exactly have the massive variations in population between states that we do now.


BIGV - 11/20/2018 at 03:33 PM

quote:
quote:
quote:
Sorry you don't appreciate democracy


Not applicable, of course I do. One State should not dictate policy, ever.


Of course not, but if "All Men are Created Equal," then every citizen should have equal representation.


They currently do, it is referred to as participation in the system, or Voting

quote:
You may be happy that each citizen of Wyoming gets a greater say as to who is president or who sits on the Supreme Court than a citizen of NY or CA, but that goes against one of the founding principles of this nation. And when the constitution was ratified we didn't exactly have the massive variations in population between states that we do now.


If you think the population of Wyoming is small now, imagine it in 1890 at the time of Statehood...

California currently has 55 Electoral votes and Montana has THREE. Now tell me how Montana and its voters have a bigger say than California?... C'mon man, the Fathers got it right, otherwise this would be the United States of Caliyork.


porkchopbob - 11/20/2018 at 03:46 PM

quote:
California currently has 55 Electoral votes and Montana has THREE. Now tell me how Montana and its voters have a bigger say than California?... C'mon man, the Fathers got it right, otherwise this would be the United States of Caliyork.


What he's referring to is the ratio of residents:electoral votes. States with smaller populations sometimes carry more electoral power because of the 3 electoral minimum.

Population:electoral votes

CA 39M:55 = means 1 electoral vote represents 709K people in California.
WY 579K:3 = means 1 electoral vote represents 193K people in Wyoming.

Therefore, a vote cast in Wyoming carries more than 3 times the weight of a vote cast in California for a national election.

[Edited on 11/20/2018 by porkchopbob]


2112 - 11/20/2018 at 05:26 PM

quote:
quote:
California currently has 55 Electoral votes and Montana has THREE. Now tell me how Montana and its voters have a bigger say than California?... C'mon man, the Fathers got it right, otherwise this would be the United States of Caliyork.


What he's referring to is the ratio of residents:electoral votes. States with smaller populations sometimes carry more electoral power because of the 3 electoral minimum.

Population:electoral votes

CA 39M:55 = means 1 electoral vote represents 709K people in California.
WY 579K:3 = means 1 electoral vote represents 193K people in Wyoming.

Therefore, a vote cast in Wyoming carries more than 3 times the weight of a vote cast in California for a national election.



Even Trump called the Electoral College unfair, until of course it benefited him.


BIGV - 11/20/2018 at 05:30 PM

quote:
Even Trump called the Electoral College unfair, until of course it benefited him.


The next time a Presidential Election hinges on the Electoral College and the Democratic Candidate wins as a result....

.....All lips will be sealed


emr - 11/20/2018 at 06:10 PM

The definition of a good compromise is that both sides feel they got short changed. Maybe the founding fathers knew what they were doing.


BrerRabbit - 11/20/2018 at 06:21 PM

quote:
The next time a Presidential Election hinges on the Electoral College and the Democratic Candidate wins as a result....

.....All lips will be sealed


When Bush won by electoral in 2000 there wasn't anything like this from Gore (who I can't stand btw):



Hillary Clinton didn't bash the electoral college when Trump got elected.

If it happens again Trump will about face and go right back to whining like he did when Obama won both electoral and popular. "THE LOSER ONE"! LOL

[Edited on 11/20/2018 by BrerRabbit]


BoytonBrother - 11/20/2018 at 08:23 PM

quote:
It is truly weird how they react to criticism of Trump as if they are extensions of the Master's Will and it is criticism of themselves. Saw a recent poster here bellyaching how folks think he is a POS if he likes the prez.


x2. It’s very telling. I think Obama “fans” behaved the same way, but when you compare the character of each President.......sheesh! If you believe you relate to Obama, good for you. If you feel you relate to Trump, then I’m so sorry, and I hope you get they help you need.


BIGV - 11/20/2018 at 09:47 PM

quote:
The definition of a good compromise is that both sides feel they got short changed.


Excellent. To whom is this quote attributed?

quote:
Maybe the founding fathers knew what they were doing.


I certainly believe this.


gina - 11/20/2018 at 10:47 PM

quote:
quote:
I'm sure The Cult of Trump members will be along soon to defend this.


It is truly weird how they react to criticism of Trump as if they are extensions of the Master's Will and it is criticism of themselves. Saw a recent poster here bellyaching how folks think he is a POS if he likes the prez. Strange how they identify so completely with their idol. Creepsville.






That is so horrible but there were also remarks about the Washington Post reporter Jamal Kashoggi's killing that were troubling.


Muleman1994 - 11/26/2018 at 09:42 PM

Democrats attack President Trump for defending the U.S. border.

When Obama did the same thing, the Democrats remained silent.

The Democrats now use hypocrisy instead of patriotism.

When hundreds of illegal migrants attempted to storm past the U.S. border on Sunday, border patrol agents engaged the mob — and when the crowd began hurling rocks and debris, authorities deployed tear gas.

The mainstream media immediately using the incident to attack President Donald Trump, accusing him of using inhumane tactics on women and children. Democratic lawmakers blasted the president as well, calling the border patrol’s actions “shameful” and “disgusting.”

So where were these complaints in 2013, when former President Barack Obama’s border patrol did the same exact thing?

“In 2013, during the Obama administration, Border Patrol agents reportedly used pepper spray to fend off a group of approximately 100 migrants who attempted to rush the same San Ysidro port of entry”.


Obama agents pepper-sprayed migrants: History challenges caravan response outrage
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-agents-pepper-sprayed-migrants-histo ry-challenges-caravan-response-outrage

Democrats are expressing outrage that U.S. border agents on Sunday shot rounds of tear gas at caravan migrants who threw rocks at law enforcement while trying to breach the U.S.-Mexico border. But critics hammering the Trump administration are glossing over a similar episode that occurred under then-President Barack Obama.

In 2013, during the Obama administration, Border Patrol agents reportedly used pepper spray to fend off a group of approximately 100 migrants who attempted to rush the same San Ysidro port of entry.

A San Diego Union-Tribune article at the time said agents fired "pepper balls" and used other “intermediate use-of-force devices” to repel the crowd. The migrants in that confrontation also reportedly threw rocks and bottles at U.S. authorities.

But with the national spotlight on Sunday's caravan clash at San Ysidro, Democrats are lashing out at the Trump administration.

TRUMP TELLS MEXICO TO SHIP MIGRANTS HOME OR SEE BORDER PERMANENTLY CLOSED

In a tweet directed at the president on Monday, New York Democratic Rep. Carolyn Maloney said, “Migrants at our border are looking for help. Yet, instead of greeting them w understanding, you deploy tear gas. Shameful & disgusting.”

New York Democratic Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand called the use of tear gas “horrendous.”

“We must hold those responsible accountable,” Gillibrand tweeted. “Children who approach our country looking for asylum should be welcomed with open arms, not with tear gas.”

Ben Rhodes, the former Obama administration adviser, tweeted: “It’s wrong to gas women and children and the elderly. That shouldn’t be a partisan view, nor should that be uncomfortable to ‘the men and women in duty.’”

Rhodes, in particular, faced online pushback over his comments from conservatives, who referenced the 2013 episode during the Obama years.

“Ben Rhodes was part of an administration that did the very same exact thing,” conservative commentator Stephen Miller said.

The Trump administration, meanwhile, defended the response on Sunday. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said in a statement some migrants "attempted to breach legacy fence infrastructure along the border and sought to harm [U.S. Customs and Border Protection] personnel by throwing projectiles at them.”

The criticism from Democrats follows other examples of liberals blasting Trump for things that also happened in prior administrations, including sending troops to the border, as Obama did in 2010.

In May, liberal activists and journalists also incorrectly shared pictures of children sleeping in enclosed cages from 2014 to take a swipe at the Trump administration and its zero-tolerance policy toward parents and children crossing the border illegally. Those photos were taken during the Obama administration.

The latest confrontation with caravan members has captured lawmakers' attention. The clash Sunday came as hundreds of migrants from a caravan that originated in Central American pushed past Mexican riot police and rushed the border at the port of entry in San Ysidro.

HUNDREDS OF MIGRANTS TRY RUSHING TOWARD CALIFORNIA PORT OF ENTRY, AS TRUMP THREATENS TO CLOSE ENTIRE BORDER
Video

On Monday, Trump offered Mexico some advice on deporting migrants massed in Tijuana and threatening to storm the U.S., telling the neighboring nation in a tweet to send them “back to their countries” by plane or by bus – or face a permanent closure of the border.

HOMELAND SECURITY ARRESTS ABOUT 50 MIGRANTS WHO CROSSED US BORDER, OFFICIAL SAYS

Trump’s tweet followed a vow from Mexico to deport migrants who tried to illegally enter the U.S. The Trump administration has said asylum claims from members of a series of caravans originating in Central America must be processed outside the U.S., and that all those entering illegally will be denied. A federal judge has at least temporarily ruled against the policy, but the administration has taken steps to harden the border.

“Mexico should move the flag waving Migrants, many of whom are stone cold criminals, back to their countries,” Trump tweeted early Monday morning. “Do it by plane, do it by bus, do it anyway you want, but they are NOT coming into the U.S.A. We will close the Border permanently if need be. Congress, fund the WALL!”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-agents-pepper-sprayed-migrants-histo ry-challenges-caravan-response-outrage





Stephen - 11/27/2018 at 02:10 AM

It's off topic but it's the WP
Current Headline

"7 nooses found by Mississippi Capitol before Senate runoff"

60-something years on, the Phil Ochs song "Here's To The State of Mississippi" continues to be right -- racist slimeballs continue to grow out from under rocks, and fester there

why would immigrants want anything to do w/the USA with Hitler-like stuff like that, mass shootings etc, still devouring the soul of America

on topic, don't know why the immigration problem is so difficult


BrerRabbit - 11/27/2018 at 04:20 PM

quote:
In 2013, during the Obama administration, Border Patrol agents reportedly used pepper spray to fend off a group of approximately 100 migrants who attempted to rush the same San Ysidro port of entry.


Sounds like the Obama admin was enforcing border security. Then why are you always screeching how Obama was against a secure border?

[Edited on 11/27/2018 by BrerRabbit]


BIGV - 11/27/2018 at 04:40 PM

quote:
quote:
In 2013, during the Obama administration, Border Patrol agents reportedly used pepper spray to fend off a group of approximately 100 migrants who attempted to rush the same San Ysidro port of entry.


Sounds like the Obama admin was enforcing border security. Then why are you always screeching how Obama was against a secure border?


I guess the point is that both Administrations have done it. So, you are either for it, or against it.

Where do you stand?


BrerRabbit - 11/27/2018 at 04:50 PM

I'm for open borders.


BIGV - 11/27/2018 at 04:56 PM

quote:
I'm for open borders.


Could not disagree more.

But thanks for clearing that up.


BrerRabbit - 11/27/2018 at 05:12 PM


quote:
Could not disagree more.

But thanks for clearing that up.


No problem. My opinion is moot, a pipe dream of an uattainable world of cooperation and prosperity. So nothing to argue about, the Babylonian warring nation-state paradigm isn't going away anytime soon. We all have our Quixotic visionary quirks, like actually living the teachings of Christ, or having a Libertarian in the Whie House.


BIGV - 11/27/2018 at 05:18 PM

quote:
a pipe dream of an unattainable world of cooperation and prosperity


Not "unattainable"...just not going to happen until every nation carries its own weight. No one wants to consistently carry or support anyone. Marriages, friendships, neighborhoods etc. Everyone is successful and content when the load and responsibility are shared by all involved.


BIGV - 11/27/2018 at 05:26 PM

" Why is the Immigration Problem so Difficult"

I would add that the refugees seeking "Asylum" are not strengthening their case by flying the Flag of the Country they are fleeing while claiming oppression. Not throwing rocks when their attempt to scale a border wall is refused night also help their cause, as would the cessation of placing children in the front lines....

A U.S. Flag or two might even send a positive message.


BrerRabbit - 11/27/2018 at 05:32 PM

Pardon me if I don't take this too seriously, partisan squabbling over border scuffles is a pretty tired standard number by now. As for the ideals in question:

To dream the impossible dream
To fight the unbeatable foe
To bear with unbearable sorrow
To run where the brave dare not go

To right the unrightable wrong
To love pure and chaste from afar
To try when your arms are too weary
To reach the unreachable star

This is my quest to follow that star
No matter how hopeless, no matter how far
To fight for the right
Without question or pause
To be willing to march
Into hell for a heavenly cause

And I know if I'll only be true
To this glorious quest
That my heart will lie peaceful and calm
When I'm laid to my rest

And the world will be better for this
That one man, scorned and covered with scars
Still strove with his last ounce of courage
To reach the unreachable star
The fight the unbeatable foe
To dream the impossible dream




BrerRabbit - 11/27/2018 at 05:40 PM

Gotta agree they are a-holes with their ridiculous flags.

Btw BigV, the Don Quixote optical illusion painting is by Octavio Campo, a Mexican artist, his work is handled in the US by a gallery in Sedona, north side of town on 89a, originals hanging there, he did a great John Lennon, same composite illusion style.

Sedona gallery link:

https://visionsfineart.com/ocampo/index.html


BoytonBrother - 11/27/2018 at 06:06 PM

quote:
Sounds like the Obama admin was enforcing border security. Then why are you always screeching how Obama was against a secure border?


And why would Trump copy his most hated nemesis that he thinks is a horrible failure?



BoytonBrother - 11/27/2018 at 06:16 PM

quote:
The mainstream media immediately using the incident to attack President Donald Trump


Since you use other people’s talking points instead of your own words, what is the definition of the “mainstream media”?

Gotta love the people that bash the mainstream media as they post a link from the mainstream media and cite the mainstream media as fact.


BoytonBrother - 11/27/2018 at 06:18 PM

quote:
Democrats attack President Trump for defending the U.S. border.

When Obama did the same thing, the Democrats remained silent.


Mule is shocked to hear that politicians play politics in Washington.


BIGV - 11/27/2018 at 06:52 PM

quote:
quote:
Sounds like the Obama admin was enforcing border security. Then why are you always screeching how Obama was against a secure border?


And why would Trump copy his most hated nemesis that he thinks is a horrible failure?


"Copy" is not an applicable term. It was the appropriate measure needed by both Administrations.


BrerRabbit - 11/27/2018 at 07:53 PM

That's where you differ drastically from the hardliners who believe everything one administration does is successful, right and good, where another administration could only fail, err, and be bad. Until their idol needs his actions defended then they immediately point out similar actions done by their enemy, whom they suddenly agree with if it suits their agenda. Every time. Add up how many times this happens and you end up with resounding support of many the policies of their enemy, who they claim is 100% wrong on everything, 100% of the time. Horsesh!t.


sckeys - 11/27/2018 at 08:09 PM

I can’t imagine Obama doing this, with him hating America and all.


BIGV - 11/27/2018 at 08:20 PM

quote:
That's where you differ drastically from the hardliners who believe everything one administration does is successful, right and good, where another administration could only fail, err, and be bad. Until their idol needs his actions defended then they immediately point out similar actions done by their enemy, whom they suddenly agree with if it suits their agenda. Every time. Add up how many times this happens and you end up with resounding support of many the policies of their enemy, who they claim is 100% wrong on everything, 100% of the time. Horsesh!t.


I can only speak for myself, period. Your statement above very clearly (at least to me) defines the "problem" with identifying as a "Democrat" or a "Republican". For a reason that has never been clear to me, politically speaking, one Party has to fit the other into a nice, little, Box. "Oh, you believe that!?...How could you?!...You must be a _________"! And conversely these same people have a tremendously challenging road ahead of them when confronted by anyone with views they can not categorize.

For example: "This administration took the steps it felt necessary to deal with the issue at hand"

It matters not to me who has executed these solutions before, but rather, "is this the process that has the best chance of success now"?

I do however find it incredibly hypocritical of any group to criticize an action they themselves had adopted in prior similar circumstances, regardless of who attempted it first. "Neener, neener" at its finest. And a perfect answer to why so little compromise is ever agreed upon.


BrerRabbit - 11/27/2018 at 08:28 PM

Crying hypocrite at a party-liner is like yelling blue at the sky. Zero point in that noise.

Good this border mess hasn't erupted into shooting and fatalities so far.


BIGV - 11/27/2018 at 09:02 PM

quote:
Crying hypocrite at a party-liner is like yelling blue at the sky. Zero point in that noise.


Yet both groups continue with this behavior.------ "hypocritical of any group"
Trust me it will be the other Parties "turn" soon enough.

quote:
Good this border mess hasn't erupted into shooting and fatalities so far.


My sincere hope is that this will not transpire; the burden of a death is more on the refugees than it is on the Border patrol. They can choose to respect the LAW of the country they "desperately" want to enter. Climbing over fences and throwing stones while waving Flags that represent the Homeland that has tyrannized them does not accurately depict one seeking asylum.

If you don't want violence, do not try to cross the border Illegally.


BrerRabbit - 11/27/2018 at 11:54 PM

Pretty dumb to show up at the border in a big crowd all after asylum at once. Guaranteed bureaucratic boondoggle. As well as the bullsh!t behavior BigV pointed out, foolish and offensive. If I was the judge reviewing the asylum application and saw notes the person was being a nuisance at the border I would not grant the request.

Under US law illegal crossing is a misdemeanor, although there is a penalty it does not bar you from applying for asylum once you are in the country, although it could affect the judge's ruling.

Can't blame them for trying, any one of us would do the same thing if forced by circumstance.


gina - 11/28/2018 at 12:56 AM

quote:
It's off topic but it's the WP
Current Headline

"7 nooses found by Mississippi Capitol before Senate runoff"

60-something years on, the Phil Ochs song "Here's To The State of Mississippi" continues to be right -- racist slimeballs continue to grow out from under rocks, and fester there

why would immigrants want anything to do w/the USA with Hitler-like stuff like that, mass shootings etc, still devouring the soul of America

on topic, don't know why the immigration problem is so difficult


Stephen this deserves it's own thread. Please create one.

There is a lot going on with these statewide races. For those who are unaware significant changes have been made in different states. North Dakota amended their state Constitution to create an ethics commission. Massachusetts also created a Citizens Commission. Ohio passed legislation making abortion illegal and criminalizing it so that Dr.'s who help women get them can be sent to prison.

In this day and age for nooses to appear in Mississippi tells you how serious problems are in some of the states in this country.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/27/politics/mississippi-senate-what-to-watch/in dex.html



[Edited on 11/28/2018 by gina]


BrerRabbit - 11/28/2018 at 05:17 AM

Gina that link is to CNN. Must be fake noose.


BIGV - 11/28/2018 at 04:53 PM


Muleman1994 - 11/28/2018 at 09:17 PM

The U.S. Border Patrol agents used non-lethal tear-gas on a large group of men that were attacking them with rocks and chunks of concrete.

The Democrats and lefties scream that “Trump is using chemical weapons against women and children” which is a gross misrepresentation of what happened.

When the same actions were taken by the Obama administration many times the Democrats and lefties said nothing.

The Democrats and lefties are hypocrites.



sckeys - 11/28/2018 at 09:23 PM

quote:


The Democrats and lefties are hypocrites.





Good one


BrerRabbit - 11/28/2018 at 09:50 PM

Democrat bad. Republican good.


Muleman1994 - 11/28/2018 at 10:07 PM

quote:
Democrat bad. Republican good.


The bad is inadequate immigration laws and the political game playing.


Sang - 11/28/2018 at 11:56 PM

So who has been in charge of congress and the white house? What have they done about it, except make it worse?


Muleman1994 - 11/29/2018 at 12:34 AM

quote:
So who has been in charge of congress and the white house? What have they done about it, except make it worse?


President Trump made Chuck and Nancy a comprehensive offer that included many more dreamers than they had asked.

Schumer and Pelosi refused.

The Democrats walked away.



gina - 11/30/2018 at 07:34 PM

quote:
The U.S. Border Patrol agents used non-lethal tear-gas on a large group of men that were attacking them with rocks and chunks of concrete.

The Democrats and lefties scream that “Trump is using chemical weapons against women and children” which is a gross misrepresentation of what happened.

When the same actions were taken by the Obama administration many times the Democrats and lefties said nothing.

The Democrats and lefties are hypocrites.


Sound Cannons would disperse a crowd and turn them away. It even worked on hardened Al Qaida fighters in Iraq. Nobody could bear the effects of those sound cannons.



This thread come from : Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band
https://allmanbrothersband.com/

Url of this website:
https://allmanbrothersband.com//modules.php?op=modload&name=XForum&file=viewthread&fid=127&tid=147342