FLBear5630 said:
whiterock said:
FLBear5630 said:
whiterock said:
Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
Wangchung said:
Limited IQ Redneck in PU said:
Wangchung said:
This is why I hate the mainstream media. Trump is a terrible public speaker but if I don't watch his speeches for myself I get nothing but lies and parsed statements given meaning he never implied. So the corrupt media forces me to suffer through the entirety of his speeches so I don't believe lies like "he called all Mexicans rapists!" and "He said Nazis were very fine people!!!"
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."
You are correct. He didnt call all Mexicans rapists. Just the ones coming to America. But of course some of them are good people despite bringing drugs, crime and rape.
That's a lie. He said some of the ones coming ILLEGALLY are criminals, including rapists. It's right there in the quote you provided. And he is right. Good people follow the law and come legally. People with zero respect for our laws or who wouldn't be allowed to come legally cross illegally.
They (the people that cross the border) are rapist. Who else could he be talking about? Good people do follow the laws. A man with a family finally decides he cant feed and provide for his children. He does what he needs to do. Some laws are above others. Its cost an average of 4000 to 8000 usd to try to immigrate. And the wait can be years. I know you have never broken a law but sometimes a man does what a man does. We need immigration reform. Both parties have failed.
the words "immigration reform" have become meaningless. they now mean "changing the stuff I don't like."
I'm completely against "reform" until we enforce the laws we have on the books. What good would "reform" do? If we don't enforce the law we have, what good will it do to change the law?
So, would reviewing a law that does not get enforced or a policy that is not applied worth a discussion? How do you solve anything if the baseline is apply the law you don't want to apply. Why? Why are these laws not being enforced?
Until we deal with the root cause, simply saying maintain the staus quo by enforcement has no shot of accomplishing anything. There has to be a position that works for both, otherwise this is just word games. It will bounce back and forth depending on who is in the White House. Without some level of both side based reform, we will continue to be Executive Orders with the Courts as referee...
The root cause is the irreconcilable tension which exists between three key factors:
1) international demand for US citizenship exceeds supply (quotas) by multiple orders of magnitude, versus 2) US macroeconomic needs significantly more immigration to offset subpar birth rates, versus 3) the US public, while in support of immigration in principle, does not want to open our country up to immigration rates anywhere near necessary to ameliorate factors 1 or 2.
No policy can address all three factors. Any policy one enacts will put tread marks on one or more of them. Biden has chosen to exploit #1 in order to benefit #2 (the stimulus effect of mass immigration) and pay the price on #3, with the defense line of "I am powerless to stop this without immigration reform. In fairness to Joe, all previous admins except Trump did the same thing. Biden is just more brazen about it..
Or, you have to win Super Majorities AND the White House and bully it through. There are 2 chances of that. So, I expect more *****ing on both sides with little being accomplished. But, you will feel better...
PFFT. See above. You don't understand the problem.
Trump stopped the flow using the same law Biden claims ties his hands. And Trump did it with courts fighting him every quarter-inch of every step of the way. The "remain in Mexico" policy was accomplished with EXISTING law....he figured out a way to get where he wanted to be. Biden is doing the same, just with different objective.
Start returning every single migrant to Mexico to await the adjudication of their refugee petitions and the migrant rates will plummet (just like they did under Trump). Few people will want to give their life savings to the Mexican cartels to smuggle them into a country if there is a 50% chance they'll get caught and sent back to Mexico to await the resolution of an asylum application they very well know will be denied.
Sure, we can tweak margins of code in ways that should reasonably be expected to further deter flow. For example, we can make illegal border crossing a felony, or a permanent disqualification for citizenship, or make it a crime for any non-citizen, legal or not, to register to vote. but that's not what Democrats mean when they say the words "immigration reform." When they use those two words together, they mean "we want unrestricted immigration here to be safe, legal, and demographically transformative." More to the point, though, it really doesn't matter what the law says once you decide not to enforce it. And that's the real issue here - Biden admin is taking action/inaction flatly at odds with the law as written, and at odds with the clear will of the American people.
No doubt, but you keep missing the bigger issue. Any fixes are temporary, Executive Orders are not governing. All we are doing is playing ping pong. Why? The American voter is not going to go GOP or Dem for extended periods of time. Unless some level of agreement is reached, this will not end. We will go from building a wall to open borders. Your zero sum game attitude is setting the GOP up for major frustration. The system is set up for compromise, as much as youguys seem to dispise it. It is not set up for complete control you seem to want. Unless, you are talking total overhaul to a Totaltarian system, but that is a slippery slope. GOP we may lose...
You are in the 99th percentile when it comes to rigidly clinging to middle ground fallacy.
Trump stopped the flow, primarily by demonstrating will (wall building) and executing good policy (remain in Mexico), and he did it fighting establismentarian resistance every step of the away, despite the policy being popular (certainly a factor in his 2016 election). Biden literally campaigned on ending that success, then did it, with multiple XOs to strip away Trump policy line by line. The border crisis exploded. And now Trump is likely going to win re-election in no small part because of what Biden purposely did to create the crisis = the American people see it and do not like it a bit. So if he does win, do you propose that Trump reinstall all of his successful policies (and more), thereby satisfying the will of a vast majority of the American people (as expressed in a national election)......or only install half of those successful policies, so he can make the Democrats happy that they got something.
Middle ground is easy to spot sometimes. We can argue about the number of bridges we need and where to put them. We can argue about whether Marines should have tanks or not....whether or not retirement age of SS should be 67 or 77, etc. Sometimes, though. Sometimes....there is no middle ground. There is no middle ground on the definition of marriage, or definition of what is a a boy and girl, etc.... Life abounds with things that cannot easily be compromised.
We can compromise on the issue of how many legal immigrants to take. We can compromise on the preference categories about which immigrants we are going to take and not. But on the question of illegal crossing of our southern border, there really isn't any middle ground. We defend our border. It is always wrong to cross our border illegally. If you cross our border illegally, you are going back whence you came, with sanction. If we don't deal with it that way, we are just ignoring the law to do whatever we damned well want to, which is what Democrats are up to at the moment. I am not interested in stopping on 50% of what the Democrats are doing just to show how committed I am to moderation. I'm going to enforce the damned law. If you want to stop me, fine. Stop me. Sure you can go to court and force me to stop. But where's the middle ground there?
Don't confuse consensus with middle ground. There isn't a lot of middle ground on immigration anymore, certainly not between the policy objectives of the two parties. But there is consensus in the public that the out of controlled border crossings have to stop. Is it really so radical to act on that consensus?
