RE: The times will change

RE: The times will change (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

slvemike4u -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 8:52:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 I don't want them jailed, I want them dropped (or, preferably stopped) at the border and ushered across to the other side where they came from until they apply and are accepted to be here legally... That is a different question in it's entirety....What you are wanting is secure borders.I think most everyone can get behind that idea. What that fails to address is the millions and millions already here.What do we do about them ?

darkwanderer3305 -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 9:18:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 I don't want them jailed, I want them dropped (or, preferably stopped) at the border and ushered across to the other side where they came from until they apply and are accepted to be here legally... That is a different question in it's entirety....What you are wanting is secure borders.I think most everyone can get behind that idea. What that fails to address is the millions and millions already here.What do we do about them ? Send them home until and/or unless they go through legal channels to enter the country legally...

DesideriScuri -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 9:57:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice Doesn't the new immigration policy require those who came illegally to pay a fine and go to the end of the legalization queue? I think it does impost a fine, but, as for going to the back of the line? Not necessarily. The people who have already come here illegally can get a work visa right now. There is a limit on the number of those we allow every year (I'm not even sure why we put a limit on that), so, no, they won't be going to the back of the line. We also have limits on the number of immigrants allowed from any one country to prevent that country from sending "too many" immigrants, as compared to the total number (iirc, it's 1/6 of the total immigrant population can be nationals from one country). While that will help spread immigration access to nationals of a greater number of countries, if we removed the limits on how many immigrants we let in, there wouldn't be any need for ratio limits. There are people who are waiting in their home countries for the opportunity to legally come to America. Those who have already come here illegally are not being sent behind them in line. They are being allowed to stay here.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 9:59:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 I don't want them jailed, I want them dropped (or, preferably stopped) at the border and ushered across to the other side where they came from until they apply and are accepted to be here legally... That is a different question in it's entirety....What you are wanting is secure borders.I think most everyone can get behind that idea. What that fails to address is the millions and millions already here.What do we do about them ? Isn't it a better idea to plug the hole in the boat before you decide what to do with the water that's already come in?

dcnovice -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 11:12:20 AM)
quote: I think it does impost a fine, but, as for going to the back of the line? Not necessarily. The people who have already come here illegally can get a work visa right now. There is a limit on the number of those we allow every year (I'm not even sure why we put a limit on that), so, no, they won't be going to the back of the line. I think I remember the President's saying they'd go to the back of the proverbial line for citizenship applications, but I'm no expert on this.

slvemike4u -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 11:48:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 I don't want them jailed, I want them dropped (or, preferably stopped) at the border and ushered across to the other side where they came from until they apply and are accepted to be here legally... That is a different question in it's entirety....What you are wanting is secure borders.I think most everyone can get behind that idea. What that fails to address is the millions and millions already here.What do we do about them ? Send them home until and/or unless they go through legal channels to enter the country legally... Do you have any idea at all the cost of such a program,the impossibility of achieving such an outcome ?

RottenJohnny -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 12:36:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Isn't it a better idea to plug the hole in the boat before you decide what to do with the water that's already come in? [:D]

CreativeDominant -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 12:37:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 I don't want them jailed, I want them dropped (or, preferably stopped) at the border and ushered across to the other side where they came from until they apply and are accepted to be here legally... That is a different question in it's entirety....What you are wanting is secure borders.I think most everyone can get behind that idea. What that fails to address is the millions and millions already here.What do we do about them ? Send them home until and/or unless they go through legal channels to enter the country legally... Do you have any idea at all the cost of such a program,the impossibility of achieving such an outcome ? Do you have any idea of the cost of supporting these people? And just because a task is "impossible", does that mean we should just say "fuck it? Let 'em stay and WELCOME!!!" ?

DesideriScuri -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 12:54:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: I think it does impost a fine, but, as for going to the back of the line? Not necessarily. The people who have already come here illegally can get a work visa right now. There is a limit on the number of those we allow every year (I'm not even sure why we put a limit on that), so, no, they won't be going to the back of the line. I think I remember the President's saying they'd go to the back of the proverbial line for citizenship applications, but I'm no expert on this. I think we've had enough experience with US Presidents not telling the whole truth, haven't we? While the bill (after reading related articles) does seem to put those already here illegally at the back of the naturalization line, as you (and the President) claimed. But, what if naturalization isn't even a goal for those coming here illegally? What if the only reason they are here is to make money to send back to their home countries? Article that speculates (and even states that it's speculation). Article that doesn't speculate on how many, but shows that illegal immigrants are divided on the attainment of naturalization. So, if a person only wants to be here legally, but has no care for becoming a US Citizen, ending the threat of deportation basically rewards that person with their end game: legal presence.

mnottertail -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 1:05:20 PM)
No, they dont give a fuck thats the issue. its about money. Kill the money supply, hurt the criminal employers. The problem is solved and we can rid ourselves of homeland security. If you dont have a green card, or citizenship you no workee anywhere. Game, set, match. Done after the first corporate arrests from the highest to lowest of management.

darkwanderer3305 -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 1:17:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: darkwanderer3305 I don't want them jailed, I want them dropped (or, preferably stopped) at the border and ushered across to the other side where they came from until they apply and are accepted to be here legally... That is a different question in it's entirety....What you are wanting is secure borders.I think most everyone can get behind that idea. What that fails to address is the millions and millions already here.What do we do about them ? Send them home until and/or unless they go through legal channels to enter the country legally... Do you have any idea at all the cost of such a program,the impossibility of achieving such an outcome ? Is it more than paying for all of them in the judicial and welfare systems now? Is it more than enforcing drug laws? Is it more than pursuing and punishing killers? Rapists? Bank robbers? Is it more than a war overseas? This country is built upon laws. Foreign nationals were NOT given rights in this country when the constitution was drafted. And, this country NEVER considers cost when the government decides to enact and/or enforce/impose its will on others. Cost should not be a factor. But, if it is - it will be less costly to personally fly every illegal alien back to his/her country of origin than it will to pay welfare, judicial, and other costs to the flood this new law is going to encourage. Again, if I have to follow the law; why don't they??? Right is right; wrong is wrong; and it is WRONG to secretly cross the borders of another country, to INVADE foreign soil, and expect to be rewarded for it!!!

mnottertail -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 1:38:30 PM)
Yeah, the law is every single one of them has to go before a judge before you can deport them. Civil matter. Strangle the corporations and the illegals evaporate.

darkwanderer3305 -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 1:46:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Yeah, the law is every single one of them has to go before a judge before you can deport them. Civil matter. Strangle the corporations and the illegals evaporate. I agree. Cut off the money; cut off the problem. And, I'm all for going after people/corporations that hire and/or aid illegals. But, I disagree with the law - invasion is an act of war; not a civil dispute! If you aren't going to treat illegals as prisoners of war there should be no "civil dispute" it should be as simple as pushing them back across the border they just came across. This doesn't have to be a human rights violation. Every person has the right to be treated respectfully. And, I sympathize with people wanting a better life. However, without obeying the law we have anarchy. And, if we are going to allow foreign nationals to force this country into anarchy; that standard should be across the board with every type of law - not just the laws the people who are not even citizens want to violate.

mnottertail -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 1:55:04 PM)
Yeah, you can disagree with the law all you want, but you think any of those fools are gonna change it and get it to the desk of the Prez (and based on SCOTUS rulings and the idea of noblesse oblige that we portray to the world in our official 'Merika) it will be turned out in less time than it takes to pick up a flashlight. And if it would hold, we would focus on that, instead of the simple fucking problem, incarcerate and draconian fines for those who are under this law criminals, the employers.

YouName -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 2:29:19 PM)
Sorry I meant 10 years not 10 guys in my post there. 10 years is enough to keep most people busy guessing and flipping.

YouName -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 2:31:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 quote: ORIGINAL: YouName I wonder how many asked you that question in 2003 about Bush. I guess about 10 guys is enough to keep you folks guessing and flipping. People asked questions like this for as long as I can remember. The first President I actually have an active memory of was Nixon, so for me personally, Nixon set the standard for how I viewed all subsequent Presidents during my lifetime. Of course, as I grew a bit older and studied more about our history and all the other presidents we've had, in addition to seeing 7 more guys in the job after Nixon, I've been able to put it all in better perspective. I grew up in a politically mixed family. My father and his side of the family were all staunch Republicans, a few of whom might even qualify as "arch-conservative." My mother and her side of the family were Democrats. I've been able to see both points of view, and in that sense, I don't view either party as necessarily "bad," but I don't view them as necessarily "good" either. I also try to look at them from a larger historical perspective and see how they developed into what they are today. I think people did ask those questions back in 2003, but back then, there was still quite a bit of war fever among the general public. But there have been those asking questions about US military or intelligence activities all along, but neither party has been able to give any real answers. We still question things our government did decades or even over a century ago. They questioned them back then, too. I don't think there's anything wrong with questioning the government or the President on anything. But it's a different matter when one attempts to assign blame. Party politics is about blaming the other party for your own party's screw-ups. Or taking credit when things go well. My Point was that ...well I'm not american but if I was I wouldn't be discussing politics in terms of the two parties anymore for they and their represenatives have been shown to lack charaxcter no matter which you choose.

Charles6682 -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 2:46:24 PM)
It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge.

YouName -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 2:49:06 PM)
Bombing Serbia,Bombing Libya.

CreativeDominant -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 3:39:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge. what's different?...other than Obama's orders here are illegag, something he himself has stated more or lless.

DesideriScuri -> RE: The times will change (12/11/2014 3:41:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Charles6682 It depends on what any President is using the Executive Powers for. In President Obama's case on immigration, he is doing the right thing. Republicans certainly have no intent on passing any immigration bill beyond "trap them in a net and send them all home", which is inhumane and won't work. O, that and build the new "Berlin wall" on the U.S.-Mexican border. Maybe if Republicans had tried to pass something, instead of just trying to fight Obama on everything, then maybe Obama would not have had to use "Executive Powers" on this. There's a different between using Executive Powers for something humane like this, and using Executive Powers for starting wars based on false knowledge. The "Berlin Wall" legislation was passed years ago, but never materialized. Do you understand how this representative form of government works? Elected representatives are there to represent their constituents. Now, if you have proof that the GOP representatives are casting votes in opposition to what their constituents actually want, then that's a different discussion, and one that should be had (but, by their constituents). If you don't have that proof, then, it's just as likely that the GOP representatives are faithfully representing their constituents, which is pretty much exactly what they are supposed to be doing. What war(s) were started by Executive Order based on false knowledge?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.109375