Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Main discussion area is here. Reply to a message to continue a discussion thread, or create your own new Topics.
User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

You don't have to know anything to have an opinion.

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 07 10:39

Opinions are easy, but they don't equal critical thinking. Take this issue on immigration, and consider the following information:

"From a historical perspective, the number of naturalizations has increased dramatically in recent decades. On average, 141,000 lawful permanent residents naturalized each year between 1970 and 1979, 205,000 on average per year in the 1980s, 498,000 in the 1990s, and 629,000 during the 2000-2008 period.

The number of naturalizations reached an all-time record high in 2008 (1,046,539) before falling by 28.9 percent in 2009. However, compared to 2007, the number of naturalizations in 2009 increased by 12.6 percent."


Interesting. Our country should allow legal, liberal immigration, and it does. Adding 700,000 folks every year is quite a number. Those are LEGAL immigrants. The debate is too often framed as "pro" or "anti" immigration. That misses the facts between the notions legal and illegal. Our Federal Government under Obama is not doing it's job of border enforcement and immigration enforcement, and that is a very big problem.

We have in a year or two gone from 6.000 kids crossing the border ILLEGALLY in a given year, to 60,000. Obama could END this tragedy but he won't.

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Thank Goodness

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 07 21:54

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07 ... n-history/

It will take We the People to support and encourage our State Representatives to stand up to the Feds on this CRAP SANDWICH Obama and Holder have cooked up. This issue is HUGE. This is yet another Obama Fiasco. If you are not outraged, you are not paying attention, or do not care.

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Coondog » 2014 Jul 09 11:06

You're damn right its a HUGE issue! Why......... Coondog went down there and they wouldn't let him in either. They said Coondog had no business there and sent him on his way.

The idea that a person (or a dawg or a woman) can't just walk in and out of government facilities at will just goes to prove that Obama is trying to cover something up. Going back next week with a bunch of friends and a case of Blue Ribbon.

Come to think of it....the same thing happened when Coondog tried to take a friend (a somewhat poisonous snake) into Goodlatt's offices. Got run out, again, like important business was not at hand. Like Coondog didn't belong there. What's HE hiding?

So, yeah! This is a conspiracy. A HUGE issue!

Coondog :curse:

Wait! Having thought about it................... I really DON'T care.

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

DUH!

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 09 18:09

Coondog wrote:You're damn right its a HUGE issue!
Wait! Having thought about it................... I really DON'T care.


Pretty much like any issue, you struggle to really care, or try to really grapple outside your unexamined bias. The flow of illegal children, 60,000 in the last six months as compared to 6,000 a couple years ago, will not stop till the buses start taking the illegal entrants back. 600,000 in total in the last year of all ages.

No, you don't care. I get that.

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Coondog » 2014 Jul 10 14:07

What? Sorry! It was presumed, from the text of the referenced link, that outrage was supposed to be expressed because some fool named Jim Bridenstine from Oklahoma has his nickers in a bunch over not being treated like royalty.

So....what is it we're supposed to be outraged about? Border security? Aren't these children in camps because they were caught at the border? Isn't that border security?

Get this! In the history of the world (no more than 6,000 years if you're an idiot) there have been major migrations.....population shifts due to war, famine, pestilence and natural disasters of one kind or another. It's inevitable! You can build a Great Wall, a Berlin Wall, a border fence or dig a moat. Sooner or later, the sheer power of human necessity will overpower closed societies.

You either learn to assimilate or die. This is why no one is playing against the Holy Roman Empire in the World Cup!

Now, you can attempt to bus 600,000 children to Guatamala and dump them at a McDonalds parking lot, but wouldn't it be better to just exchange them for 600,000 right wing fundamentalist "missionaries"?

Coondog :laughing:

You get a bus trip! You get a bus trip! Crux........you can drive!

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Hopeless Hopeless Hopeless

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 10 20:55

The Federal Government, denying our Elected Representatives from visiting these facilities, in their own Home Districts SHOULD alarm you, and is not akin to YOU crackdog, being asked to leave the office of Bob Goodlatte! The Federal Government is keeping the Press at bay, and placing undue pressure on Border Patrol Agents from speaking out. As well this is not a "migration". This is human trafficking of underage kids. Some estimates are that over 2/3 of the girls have been RAPED. Maiming, murders, rape. Extortion, and torture. This is HUMAN TRAFFICKING. Either care or don't care but talking out of you butt makes you look like a jerk.

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

gibberish and nonsense is what you are good for

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 10 20:59

Coondog wrote:
Get this! In the history of the world (no more than 6,000 years if you're an idiot) there have been major migrations.....population shifts due to war, famine, pestilence and natural disasters of one kind or another. It's inevitable! You can build a Great Wall, a Berlin Wall, a border fence or dig a moat. Sooner or later, the sheer power of human necessity will overpower closed societies.


Is the U.S. a "closed society"??? Is this your assertion???

User avatar
Kevsky
Posts: 131
Joined: 2013 Sep 24 07:32

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Kevsky » 2014 Jul 12 07:53

Our borders are being assaulted by refugees........ children seeking asylum from Central American countries where conditions are what we call in dawgpatch really, really bad. They're not coming here to steal our jobs. They're coming here to have a life.

This is not a matter of boarder security. Security is stopping and rounding them up at the boarder

Just to clarify, Are you speaking of borders or boarders or just using them interchangebly?
Cowards that you are, perhaps the opportunity has presented itself for you to actually stand up for the principles those Founding Fathers you so adore, envisioned.

Are members of Congress really cowards for standing up for the concerns of their constituents who are worried about the unending flow of illegal immigrants coming to our country? How many are you taking in at your house? Are you giving up your job or your government subsidies for them? Are you selling off your assets and taking a bus down to Central America to help these people? What sacrifices are you making for them? It is pretty easy to step up on your soap box, puff out your chest, cry your crocodile tears and condemn anyone who would stand for prudence and sound judgement regarding this issue. It is really easy to sit on your butt and complain that others are not generous enough with their money as long as it does not directly impact your quality of life.

They're not coming here to steal our jobs. They're coming here to have a life.

They are coming here to improve their quality of life. The countries they are coming from are not experiencing devastating wars, famines or disease any more than what they have been enduring for years. What they are enduring is certainly a low quality of life and a high crime rate, similar to the Democrat-controlled cities of Chicago and Detroit. For the most part, the quality of life in Central America has been pretty bad for the last 50 years. In fact, one can state it may have been worse in the 1980's when Nicaragua was experiencing it's Socialist revolution and El Salvador, Guatamala and Honduras were enduring their string of dictatorships. If it was truly a refugee situation due to war, genocide, famine disease, etc. than merely getting them across the border to Mexico or to Costa Rica or Belize would alleviate the situation and provide them safety and security. However, they are not wanting to stay in Mexico, Costa Rica or Belize. These countries are relatively stable Democracies. However, the problem is that these countries would not provide them the level of Government hand-outs that the illegals can get in the U.S. and would not provide their parents citizenship, something their parents believe they will be able to get in the U.S. with a willing Administration. And there in lies the problem. This not an issue about "Saving the Children". This is an issue of the citizens of the Central American countries wanting to pawn off their responsiblities (surplus children) to the U.S. and possibly gain citizenship, and the goodies that come with it, coinciding with "El Presidente Obama" using the situation for his own political purposes.

Even the meanest, most despicable members might vote for a measure that allows them to slough off the responsibility to somebody else more willing to deal with it. And these children, thus relieved of the perpetual fear for their lives, may actually prove to be more amicable and receptive of social norms than your own privileged, uncontrollable brats.

Congratulations, you have sunk to an all-time new low. Attacking the innocent children of those you disagree with. And you are trying to make the case that you are some altruistic, compassionate paragon of virtue? Oh the hypocrisy of the little minds never ends. Would Malia and Sasha Obama fit in to your description of "privileged, uncontrollable brats"?

Think about it. A humanitarian gesture may prove to be a positive example to our own population, currently bent on violence and inhumanity, and to the world in general. You may even dispel some of the self loathing you must surely feel given your history of dysfunction and failure.

And there you are. The true beliefs and twisted logic of liberal ideaology. Our own population, currently bent on violence and inhumanity? Let me see. Our country has sent hundreds of billions of dollars in aid to foreign countries. We have taken in millions of immigrants and spent billions to take care of them. We have taken in tens of thousands of refugees and spent billions to take care of them. We have sent our service men and women to serve and die in peace keeping and humanitarian missions to preserve peace over the world and yet we are currently bent on violence and inhumanity? Who has the self loathing??

What if those churches we're supposed to count on and social welfare organizations and just plain caring citizens, as well as state governments, took upon themselves the responsibility for this sponsorship whereas these people might assimilate, under supervision and with charity and decency, into a society that resembles the one they expected to find after such an arduous journey?

Why do they need to come here to receive the aid from these organizations. Would it not be more productive and efficient if the care for these illegals was to take place in their home countries. In essence, those who want to help these people should send aid, money, food, etc. to these countries. Hell, they should go to these countries in need themselves and dedicate themselves to the cause of which they claim to care for (many Christian charities are and have been already doing this, but you would consider them evangelizing bible-thumpers no doubt). Help to keep the citizens of these countries in their countries and help to produce a better country. The people would not have to flee their home countries. Families would remain intact. They would not have to attempt to assimilate in to a new culture (this is not taking place now anyhow). They could all work to better their country and we, the U.S. citizens, could work on bettering our lives and the lives of our less fortunate citizens who, due to the policies of the current administration, have overwhelmingly increased.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/07/08/hhs-record-number-of-americans-on-welfare/

But, ultimately, we know that creating a better life in the countries the illegal aliens are coming from and creating a better life for those in the U.S. is not the goal with regards to this current dilemma. The current border crisis, the flood of illegal immigrants, the immigration policy impasse, the inability of the current administration to secure the border, the growing division of the U.S. into ethnic and racial factions is all a product of the those who want nothing more than to transform the U.S. from its historical and traditional roots. Nothing can be more descriptive of the hate they have for traditional America than the following:
I like.

Yours is out-of the-dawghouse thinking that ought to make xenophobic, bible-thumping, states-rightsers scratch their mange in contemplation.

These are code words of what they think of the traditional American and these are who they despise.

Xenophobic Code word Definition - Anyone who believes in the traditions and history of the U.S. and wants to preserve those traditions. If you do not consent to your country being over-run by alien cultures and your culture, religion, beliefs, etc. becoming irrelevant than you are a xenophobe. Of course this does not apply to anyone else other than those of Western European or United States tradition. As an example, If you are a member of La Raza (definition "The Race") and you want to pursue beliefs of racial superiority of the Hispanic people and that your specific race has the right to over take and impose its rule over others, you are not Xenophobic.

Bible-Thumpers Code word Definition - Anyone who holds Christian traditional religious beliefs and values as they have been generally interpreted for the last 500 years. Often described as fundamentalists. If you do not accept the new theology of humanism you are a bible-thumper. If you do not give up your traditional beliefs and accept the "new morality" than you are a bigot attempting to impose your beliefs on other more "enlightened" people.

States-Rightsers Code word Definition - Anyone who does not believe the Federal Government should have total and complete power. Anyone who dares to believe that individuals should have any right to decide how they want to live their own life and to limit the amount of Government control on their lives, beliefs and values is a states rightser.

Get this! In the history of the world (no more than 6,000 years if you're an idiot) there have been major migrations.....population shifts due to war, famine, pestilence and natural disasters of one kind or another. It's inevitable! You can build a Great Wall, a Berlin Wall, a border fence or dig a moat. Sooner or later, the sheer power of human necessity will overpower closed societies.


What complete and utter idiocy. Countries, Societies, Cultures have every right and authority to exist and to maintain their culture and norms of their majority population. Merely, because a competing society or culture has the ability to breed like rabbits does not mean that society has the ability or moral authority to overtake another. And it is not inevitable. That is why Japan is Japan and not the Eastern Korean Islands, and why Korea is Korea and not the Chinese Peninsula, and why China is China and not Southern Mongolia, and why Russia is Russia and not the National Socialist Deutsch Lebensraum and why Greece is Greece and not Western Persia. Do I need to go on. History is replete with cultures and societies successfully defending themselves and no one would deny that these countries are better for having preserved their identity rather than submit to an ominous foreign invasion as a belief that it must be destiny. That my little lefty friend is true multiculturalism. Numerous, individual countries, allowed to have their own sovereignty, maintain their own culture, customs and identity and where the population of each sovereign country determines who is allowed to immigrate to their country.

Now, you can attempt to bus 600,000 children to Guatamala and dump them at a McDonalds parking lot, but wouldn't it be better to just exchange them for 600,000 right wing fundamentalist "missionaries"?


Hey, great. Another great example of the hate-filled mindset of the liberal nut-job. Look at my previous statement regarding the codeword for bible-thumper. You make my job so easy. Your hate has no bounds.
Last edited by Kevsky on 2014 Jul 13 13:05, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Obama's Man Caused Disaster

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 13 10:11

First a nod to Kevsky: There is just so much THERE there, it is all such an EPIC smackdown of a truly nutty leftist.... Here is the end:

Kevsky wrote:
Get this! In the history of the world (no more than 6,000 years if you're an idiot) there have been major migrations.....population shifts due to war, famine, pestilence and natural disasters of one kind or another. It's inevitable! You can build a Great Wall, a Berlin Wall, a border fence or dig a moat. Sooner or later, the sheer power of human necessity will overpower closed societies.


What complete and utter idiocy. Countries, Societies, Cultures have every right and authority to exist and to maintain their culture and norms of their majority population. Merely, because a competing society or culture has the ability to breed like rabbits does not mean that society has the ability or moral authority to overtake another. And it is not inevitable. That is why Japan is Japan and not the Eastern Korean Islands, and why Korea is Korea and not the Chinese Peninsula, and why China is China and not Southern Mongolia, and why Russia is Russia and not the National Socialist Deutsch Lebensraum and why Greece is Greece and not Western Persia. Do I need to go on. History is replete with cultures and societies successfully defending themselves and no one would deny that these countries are better for having preserved their identity rather than submit to an ominous foreign invasion as a belief that it must be destiny. That my little lefty friend is true multiculturalism. Numerous, individual countries, allowed to have their own sovereignty, maintain their own culture, customs and identity and where the population of each sovereign country determines who is allowed to immigrate to their country.

Now, you can attempt to bus 600,000 children to Guatamala and dump them at a McDonalds parking lot, but wouldn't it be better to just exchange them for 600,000 right wing fundamentalist "missionaries"?


Hey, great. Another great example of the hate-filled mindset of the liberal nut-job. Look at my previous statement regarding the codeword for bible-thumper. You make my job so easy. Your hate has no bounds.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

This Forum is a HOOT! Now. Take note. The current flow of underage children trafficked into this country was CAUSED by Obama's "Dream Act" Executive order of two years ago. What is happening was destined to happen. It was hoped for by smarmy Democratic Strategists purely for political ends. This is an agenda driven disaster, and the leftist activist smugly thinks it will play to their advantage. The American People will revolt against this tactic. This will not end well for Obama and the Democrats I hope and believe... Governors on Border States have been speaking out about this unfolding tragedy, writing letters warning our indifferent President as to the inevitable outcomes. This is a crass and despicable outcome, by DESIGN.

Obama and Holder and the Democrats who support them. Shame. From Fast and Furious, allowing thousands of semiautomatic rifles to walk freely over our southern border fueling a drug war, terrorism, in a crass attempt to push gun control here, and now scores of thousands of children being allowed to freely walk over our southern border... This era of America under Obama is and has been a disaster.

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Coondog » 2014 Jul 14 11:20

Thanks, Crux, but this truly nutty leftist managed to slog through that whole tirade all the way to that most telling tribute to the run-on paragraph.

What is heard is that things are how they are because they're supposed to be and, ergo, always have been and therefore always should be.

The very use, or misuse as it were, of the term "Traditional American" staggers the imagination. It that a "code word" for "white Supremacist"? Or, more typically, is that a term for something that describes someone's self image and projection of something that used to be but has evolved into something unsavory to that self image.......which would belie the entire premise of continuity expressed hitherto?

Surely those who considered themselves Traditional Aztecs or Traditional Amorites held themselves is similar self esteem?

To the situation at hand:

For someone so concerned about the difference between borders and boarders, substitution of the term immigrant for the term refugee seems to be no problem at all.

Cowards? Yes! Congress might have addressed the issue of immigration-refugees but they would not because their circular and symbiotic relationship with their constituencies feeds the ignorance that precludes action in favor of political expediency.
But, at least we can now blame it on Obama, eh?

Breed like Rabbits? Is that what all this nonsense about contraceptives is all about? You're still trying to out breed every "non-Traditional American" entity.....like some dark ages post plague strategy to maintain cultural and religious superiority?

Well.....there's anther paradox for Traditional America to contemplate. That strategy ain't working, neither!

Finally, in as much as the "missionary" idea was denounced as being "hateful", that concept appears to be more readily acceptable near the end of the chopped snake's epic fantasy. So.....maybe we're not as inflexible as we think we are?

So....maybe we might stop whining about Obama and start working on a viable solution to the problem as it exists other than putting all those children on buses to Central America. Do you know how much that would cost in Gas?

:hail: Coondog

If one is concerned about cultural purity, one might ask oneself how Germany dealt with it some three and a half score years ago.
What would a Traditional American do?

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/13/opinion/gergen-katz-border-crisis-safe-zones/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

I am actually starting to doubt your sanity...

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 14 17:53

Coondog, Sir. You manage to say so little with so many words. I admit that brevity is sometimes my problem so I can criticize a fellow wordsmith.

That aside I do not have any idea what you just said. Simply, our Federal Government has nearly NO DUTY greater than SECURING OUR BORDERS.
They have failed. Lets be clear though. The failure is both through NEGLECT, and by design. What is happening now is a tragedy on many levels.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Look. It is clear you can not focus. You can not be honest. You can not understand your opposition or the simple truths before us. In short you're lost....

crux


"The most honest, informed, fair, and most accurate observer and commentator on The Rockbridge Forum"
:numc:
(...not that great a feat given the FEW souls who dare tread these worthless waters and the VITRIOL of the LEFT...)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Seriously. Pick any issue. crux is straight up level headed.
:naughty:

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

So..........................

Postby Coondog » 2014 Jul 15 13:41

The answer to this most perplexing problem from Traditional America is to..........Blame Coondog!

You, cruxy, have the continual affectation to deny cause and effect when it exists, and, make cognitive connections between things when there are no connections to be found.

Yet, the complexity of Coondog somehow eludes you? Isn't your reaction just a bit like walking into a lecture about macroscopic quantum phenomena and telling the lecturer they're wrong because you have no idea what they're talking about?

Did you at least link to the Gergen-Katz article?

1. They offer a solution.

2. They didn't blame Coondog.

Coondog :coffee:

Thoughtful, lovable, but not too sweet.

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Coondog » 2014 Jul 15 14:25

And.......just to illustrate how amicable Coondog is, here's an article that is sure to brighten up your day: :tiphat:

San Pedro Sula, Honduras (CNN) -- The woman's eyes were swollen and red after she got off a plane in this violence-plagued Central American city Monday.

She told CNN she'd cried the whole way on the flight from New Mexico. Her 6-year-old daughter was beside her.

They were among a group of about 40 mothers and children deported from the United States to Honduras on a chartered flight Monday -- the first group of Central Americans sent home under stepped-up U.S. efforts to crack down on illegal immigration.

Asked about their journey to the United States, her 6-year-old daughter described the dangerous trek north in vivid detail: Stowing away on freight trains. Walking through a forest at night. Seeing monkeys and snakes.

Despite the dangers, her mother told CNN she'll probably make the trek again. There is nothing left for them in Honduras, she said.

Officials from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security displayed similar resolve Monday, saying the flight was a sign of future deportations.

"Our border is not open to illegal migration and we will send recent illegal migrants back," the department said in a statement. "We expect additional migrants will be returned to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador in the coming days and weeks."

The group deported Monday had recently crossed the U.S.-Mexico border and had been held in a new temporary immigrant detention facility that opened up in Artesia, New Mexico, late last month, Homeland Security officials said.

In the Artesia facility, which can house up to 700 people and had about 400 within its confines Friday, officials say undocumented immigrants will be held until their legal cases are decided. The goal, officials said last week, is to process their cases in two to four days. Video conferences with judges have helped speed up the process, officials said.

Before the facility opened up, groups of women with children from Central America were released on parole, dropped off at bus stations throughout the Southwest and told to report to Immigrations and Customs Enforcement Offices across the country in about a month.

After meeting with House Democrats on Monday, Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said authorities are building additional detention centers to house adults traveling with children.

Officials are working to correct misinformation from smugglers, who've claimed that there are "free passes" for those coming to the United States.

"Beginning this week, we are sending family units back to Central America, so the message is 'We will send you back,' " he said.

The plane arrived Monday afternoon in San Pedro Sula, where violence has earned the city a reputation as the world's murder capital.

There were 18 mothers and 22 children on the plane that arrived in Honduras on Monday, first lady Ana Garcia de Hernandez told reporters, according to CNN affiliate Televicentro. The youngest child on the plane was just months old, she said, while the oldest one was 15 or 16.

She called for Hondurans to chip in to help the returning families and said officials were developing plans to better support them.

"These are people with dreams, with illusions, and who come (back) in very difficult conditions, who are seeing that their dreams were not made a reality, seeing their aspirations frustrated. Many of them return empty-handed," she said. "And the only thing they have are debts to pay because before leaving, they got rid of everything they had."

Hernandez, who spoke as busloads of Honduran children sent back from Mexico also were expected to arrive, said she was concerned that children were being deported.

"Clearly it worries us," she said, "because we have always spoken about ensuring the best interests of the children."

Sor Valdette Willeman, who heads the Honduran government's program for returning migrants, says there's no second flight of families deported from the United States scheduled yet, but officials are expecting more to come soon. Already, flights packed with Honduran adults deported from the United States arrive daily, she said.

She said that she expected the children to arrive in good condition and that the United States has been doing everything possible to care for them and treat them in a dignified manner.

President Obama has asked Congress for $3.7 billion in emergency funds to fortify the U.S. Border Patrol and strengthen other programs for dealing with those crossing into the United States illegally as a surge of Central American women and children arrive on America's doorstep.

But the Republican-led House is not expected to move fast on the measure and doesn't want to give Obama everything he wants. Some say tweaking a 2008 law combating immigrant trafficking might be enough to stem the flow.

The White House has called the situation a "humanitarian crisis."

Republicans prefer to call it one of the Obama administration's making, and blame it for not being prepared and for an underwhelming response.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1957
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Wise One » 2014 Jul 15 15:16

Bunches of poor crying children got into America. It's Obama's fault! Impeach him.

Poor poor crying children got deported, back into squalor and danger. It's Obama's fault! Impeach him.

BTW, Coondog, I marvel at your even keel and grip on sanity during the relentless torrent of nonsense that is Crux's fire hose.

Why doesn't this dang forum have a "Like" button?

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Juggler
Posts: 710
Joined: 2007 Jun 11 03:51

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Juggler » 2014 Jul 18 10:11


User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Coyote in Chief

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 18 19:43

Obama, Coyote in Chief of the United States, is using the Federal Government and hired contractors to bus, fly, and DROP OFF HUNDREDS and THOUSANDS of illegal aliens from Central America ALL OVER THE USA!!! D.C., Dallas, upstate Michigan, Massachusetts, Nebraska.... The reports are coming in, FINALLY. This crap has got to stop!!! But sadly, IT WILL CONTINUE because that is the plan by the Coyote in Chief....

:turn:

User avatar
Neck-aint-red
Posts: 354
Joined: 2008 Apr 08 14:08

plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

Postby Neck-aint-red » 2014 Jul 19 10:21

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Straight away you betray lacking.

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 19 17:12

OF course, children have immigrated to the USA. Neck, you are aware that those immigrants coming through Ellis Island over 60 years WERE LEGAL???

Hello? Over 60 years about 150,000 immigrants came into our country LEGALLY. We naturalize over 700,000 EACH YEAR nowadays. We naturalized over 1 MILLION in 2008, a LEGAL PEAK. Two years ago 6,000 unaccompanied minors crossed our southern borders. This year just since October 60,000 have crossed. Are you really NOT AWARE of both history AND REALITY TODAY???

User avatar
Kevsky
Posts: 131
Joined: 2013 Sep 24 07:32

Re: Immigrants, Legal and Illegal

Postby Kevsky » 2014 Jul 20 16:40

For someone so concerned about the difference between borders and boarders, substitution of the term immigrant for the term refugee seems to be no problem at all.

The terminology I used when discussing the situation is correct, illegal immigrants. You can call them what you want. It looks like even in the article you quoted, that officials are calling them illegal immigrants and not refugees.
Officials from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security displayed similar resolve Monday, saying the flight was a sign of future deportations.

"Our border is not open to illegal migration and we will send recent illegal migrants back," the department said in a statement. "We expect additional migrants will be returned to Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador in the coming days and weeks."

You, cruxy, have the continual affectation to deny cause and effect when it exists, and, make cognitive connections between things when there are no connections to be found.

Let's examine cause and effect for the current crisis;
In late May, the U.S. Border Patrol interviewed unaccompanied children (UAC) and migrant families apprehended in the Rio Grande Valley. Of the 230 total migrants interviewed, 219 cited the primary reason for migrating to the United States was the perception of U.S. immigration laws granting free passes or permisos to UAC and adult female OTMs traveling with minors. Migrants indicated that knowledge of permisos was widespread across Central America due to word of mouth, local, and international media messaging—prompting many to depart for the United States within 30 days of becoming aware of these perceived benefits, according to the same reporting.

(U//LES) A majority of migrants interviewed also noted that they had encountered family units, consisting of a mother and child under the age of 18 during their journey to the United States and that the families had indicated they planned to surrender to U.S. authorities because they were informed that they would likely be released.

The EPIC report discusses the lack of correlation between violence rates in Central America and the current border crisis:

(U//LES) EPIC assesses homicide trends and migrant interviews suggest violence is likely not the principal factor driving the increase in UAC migration. While CBP data from early fiscal year 2011 indicates a steady increase in OTM and UAC migration, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) statistics— within this same timeframe— show a decline in per capita homicide rates in these three countries; El Salvador saw the sharpest decline, followed by Honduras and Guatemala, respectively.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/07/14/Leaked-Intel-Report-Violence-in-Central-America-Likely-Not-Primary-Factor-in-Border-Crisis

How is that for cause and effect. Homicide rates have fallen in Central America in recent years. (Probably due to much of the criminal element having come to the U.S.) Yet the surge in Central American illegal immigrants has increased in the last several years. Research from EPIC has indicated from surveys with the illegal immigrants that they are coming here, not because of the violence in Central America but, because of the perception that the current political situation has created a window of opportunity for them to come here.

Ann Coulter has the best analysis of the situation;
It's been fun to watch the media discuss the border crisis in real time, improvising their arguments on the fly. Let's try A, and if that doesn't work, we'll try B.

First, they said there was no surge at the border -- it was a phony crisis manufactured by the Drudge Report. The facts on he ground quickly made that argument inoperable.

Next, liberals told us these "undocumented migrants" (the PC phrase for "illegal aliens" -- because we'll never figure out what that means) were mere children fleeing violence and drug cartels.

Then we found out that more than 80 percent of the "children" were teenage males, some being recruited for the homicidal Central American gang MS-13, right there in the detention facilities.

(Suspiciously, liberals' wailing about a "humanitarian" crisis began immediately after Sen. Chuck Schumer emerged from a meeting with Democratic number-crunchers figuring out exactly how many more Latin American voters they'll need to take Texas and Florida.)

Why would there be a humanitarian crisis now? Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador -- where most of the migrants are coming from -- have been hellholes forever, even longer than Detroit.

The "horrendous civil wars in Central America" were a major topic during the presidential debates between Reagan and Mondale -- and that was in 1984. Mondale campaigned on conditioning aid to El Salvador on disbanding that country's "most lawless and notorious security forces" and bringing to justice the murderers of American nuns. Those guys are putting in for their pensions by now.

In 1992, Noam Chomsky described El Salvador and Guatemala as "murderous terrorist state(s)," adding that human rights abuses in Honduras were worse even than in Panama under Noriega.

So what's new now?

Liberals finally settled on complaining that if only we'd passed "comprehensive immigration reform," none of this would have ever happened. Why not a global warming bill? That might be nutty, but at least it wouldn't be the exact opposite of the truth.

We are not dealing with a delicate point of logic here, some tiny flaw in liberals' reasoning, where they neglect to consider this or that aspect of a situation. This is something I don't recall encountering before. It's anti-logic.

The Schumer-Rubio amnesty bill would have made this crisis 10,000 times worse than it already is.

The precise reason our borders are besieged is that the 11 million to 20 million "undocumented migrants" currently living here seem just a few more bad Marco Rubio speeches away from being legalized. And the reason they entered the country undocumentedly is that Reagan granted amnesty to 3 million illegal aliens in 1986.

Every powerful group in America is pushing for amnesty: President Obama, Sen. Schumer, Schumer's new friends Sen. Marco Rubio and Gov. Chris Christie, Wall Street, the Republican National Committee, the Democratic National Committee, farmers, ethnic activists, the entire media, wealthy elites who need domestics and the Chamber of Commerce.

Instead of "living in the shadows" -- the shadows of mass protests, New York Times magazine covers, TV shows, government housing, free schools, free medical care, free food stamps, the Catholic Church, state colleges at in-state tuition rates in 17 states -- "undocumented migrants" seem poised to become full legal residents.

With that, they would gain the additional rights to more welfare programs, to vote for more welfare programs -- and to vote for more amnesty. (Also, they won't have to worry about being deported if they're convicted of rape or murder after they're amnestied.)

Obama has already effectively granted amnesty to millions of "undocumented migrants" by refusing to deport "children," i.e., MS-13 members. (I'm starting to think somebody ought to sue that guy.)

Consequently, a lot of Latin Americans decided it was a good time to come to the U.S. to get in on Obama's administrative amnesty and also to be here in time for the next amnesty.

So why are Obama, Sen. Harry Reid, Sen. Jeff Flake, MSNBC and The New York Times editorial page all telling us that if only we'd passed "comprehensive immigration reform" -- which would grant amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants -- this never would have happened? That's the reason it's happening!

Usually, liberals push ideas that aren't true, but sound like they could be true. Raise taxes and we'll get more revenue! Give condoms to teenagers and we'll reduce unwed pregnancies! Ban guns and we'll have fewer gun crimes!

On immigration, they're out of practice and don't know what to say when their auto-pilot "living in the shadows" claptrap doesn't work.

They seem to know that the prospect of amnesty has something to do with the current crisis, so the word "amnesty" pops into their heads, and then they end up blurting out that the cause is the solution.

We need to discourage people coming to America for amnesty, by passing amnesty! Yes, of course! If Congress would only pass amnesty, the people of the world would say to themselves, "Uh-oh! I better not cross the border into America now! I'll never get amn --" Oh, wait.

It's not that one small part of their argument is wrong. It's more like there's a whole section missing from the explanation. Or as if they're talking about some other issue altogether, such as a solution to the elites' servant problem. Or two totally different ideas got into a teleportation machine and their atoms were accidentally mixed up as they traveled across the universe, which I saw happen in the movie "The Fly."

Immigration advocates don't have a good set of arguments and, with tens of thousands of "undocumented migrants" crossing the border, their usual method of prohibiting any debate on the subject isn't working.

The very inanity of their argument that amnesty would prevent people from coming here to get amnesty gobsmacks us into silence.

In the world of the sane, the only way to prevent all of Latin America's poor from showing up on our border expecting to be admitted is to repeal the law requiring that they be admitted.

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2014-07-16.html#read_more

And here is the typical mind-set of those who want to allow the amnesty
O'Malley, a potential 2016 presidential candidate, made headlines when he said that the illegal immigrant children who are flooding across the border should be considered "refugees" and given asylum so they are not sent back to "certain death." But hours after making those remarks last Friday, he reportedly begged the White House, "please don't send these kids to Western Maryland," according to CNN.

Yes. Allow me to pump up my ego by allowing me to demand that we help these "refugees". But don't make me anyway responsible for their well-being or suffer the consequence for them being here.

Who should be the ultimate decision makers in who and how many we let in to this country? Should it be those who are not citizens of this country and are willing to break the laws of this country to come to this country in hopes of reaping the social entitlements or should the decision be made by the citizens of this country who serve in it's military, who pay the taxes and who work to improve the quality of life for their family and themselves.

Our country cannot even properly take care of it's own veterans, its poor, it's inner city crime problems, it's infrastructure, etc. But we have many, who wanting to feed their ego and false altruism, demand that we spend precious resources to take care of non-citizens, while they do nothing.

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 3206
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Ouch... Kevsky.... Go easy on the Left

Postby Crux » 2014 Jul 20 20:27

Kevsky wrote:Who should be the ultimate decision makers in who and how many we let in to this country? Should it be those who are not citizens of this country and are willing to break the laws of this country to come to this country in hopes of reaping the social entitlements or should the decision be made by the citizens of this country who serve in it's military, who pay the taxes and who work to improve the quality of life for their family and themselves.

Our country cannot even properly take care of it's own veterans, its poor, it's inner city crime problems, it's infrastructure, etc. But we have many, who wanting to feed their ego and false altruism, demand that we spend precious resources to take care of non-citizens, while they do nothing
.

OOOO.... That SMARTS.... :beer: