Are Trump and the "vast majority of Americans" TRULY Anti-immigrant?

[healthmyths]

The far left uses terms like anti-immigration to try and smear anyone that does not believe what they believe.

Being against illegal immigration is not the same as legal immigration, but you can not explain that to a far left drone!

The far left needs the illegals to keep coming in the system, that way they can keep education standards very low in order to accommodate them.

Cognitive dissonance. Republicans are constantly bitching about the government's inability to do anything. But, when it comes to new citizens that are not born into this country, well they somehow believe that in that area the government is completely competent. Yep, the government can pick and choose it's citizens. The founders would be appalled.

Now the founders had a resolution for this issue.
It is in the Preamble to the Constitution...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble

The "common defense" means protecting Americans from people that don't want to become Americans, follow American Laws, wave their home country's flag, disrespect the values that Americans adhere to.

This is not "cognitive dissonance ... which the correct definition in psychology 101 is .
The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
cognitive dissonance | Definition of cognitive dissonance in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

Now there is NO dissonance at play here. GOP/Conservatives don't believe in the following example of the Obama administration forgetting "Common Defense"... specifically that means helping control the air traffic with Air traffic controllers.
The FAA under Obama decided that there wasn't enough diversity in the ATCs. So they modified the tests and evaluation criteria.
For example on the exam there are several questions that really beg the question..."what were they thinking of"?
The best answer to the question when was the last time you worked full time: Answer You haven't worked in the past 3 years.
Best answer to this question: Name their worst grade in high school: Answer: Science. Yup the FAA wanted ATCs who couldn't understand "Science".
Another question where the person answered got 5 points was if they knew a great deal about Air traffic control...while if you were a trained pilot... 2 points! Kid you not!
The test as it shows was to screen out people with aviation experience because the workforce was "too white".

Tucker Carlson Tonight 6/1/2018 – Breaking Fox News – June 1, 2018 | BuzzyBuzz

Since 2014, any applicants with aviation degrees or military service are now on equal footing
with people without any experience, because the first step to being hired means passing the questionnaire.

In some cases, applicants with no experience are passing the questionnaire while those with academic training degrees are not, according to the Association of Collegiate Training Institutions, a group of 24 CTI schools lobbying against the FAA’s current hiring policy.

“I have a couple of students who actually were air traffic controllers in the military and failed that test,” said Tom Daly, dean of Dowling College’s School of Aviation, which is one of 36 CTI schools but is not in the lobbying coalition. “How could you be an air traffic controller for five years, very successfully, and fail that test?”

FAA bid to expand air traffic hiring derided

NOW do you understand the position of GOP/Conservatives when for example the Obama administration's FAA rather NOT hire people who had Air traffic controller experiences!
Is that the Federal Government that is also in charge of "IMMIGRATION"? Do you see this gross effort to get diversity at the price of air passengers?

This is the reason for Trump's cleaning house in the government with 24,000 less people working...i.e. doing really dumb things like NOT hiring people with ATC experiences!

Talk about the "Common defense"????

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No. Trump and most Americans are genuinely Pro-Immigrant. However, most do have a problem with rampant Illegal Immigration. It's out of control. Most know our Immigration System is broken.

Personally, i welcome all Immigrants. But they need to come to my country the legal organized way. They're invited, but they need to respect my country and its laws. And I as a US Citizen, have the right to make that demand. If they don't wanna abide by our laws, they aren't welcome here. It's time for change. We need to end Illegal Immigration once and for all.

So, you believe a government should be able to pick and choose their citizens.

Why not?

Seriously? I mean can you not see the problem? A government that picks and chooses it's citizens is on the path to tyranny. There was a reason that the founders established this country with free and open borders. Founded in the belief of a social contract and "inalienable rights" that did not depend upon "citizenship", like life, liberty, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS free and open borders was primarily a protections against a too powerful government. A kind of check and balance, just like our three branches of government or bicameral legislature. but vastly more important.

The only problem I see is you. Name a country in the world that does not control immigration. Back when this country was founded, it was a vast wilderness devoid of humanity. Today, that is not the case.

I contact people by telephone across the US as a part of my new job. Two areas, on the east coast, one in the midwest and two in the western US. Guess how often I speak to someone fluent in English in those two western areas? The phones greetings for the voicemail are in Spanish, and if I talk to anyone over the age of 20, they usually do not speak English at all. I am supposed to believe these are all US citizens?

Are you seriously telling me that these people do not impact our society and our government? I am also certain that other groups in other eastern cities have the same concentrations of "illegals".

I have nothing against Hispanics as two of my three children married spouses with that ethnicity, so don't try the "race card".

Those borders allow us to control who comes in and we can do a much better job in all aspects of immigration, but to allow the government to abandon their responsibilities.

 

[Winston]

The far left uses terms like anti-immigration to try and smear anyone that does not believe what they believe.

Being against illegal immigration is not the same as legal immigration, but you can not explain that to a far left drone!

The far left needs the illegals to keep coming in the system, that way they can keep education standards very low in order to accommodate them.

Cognitive dissonance. Republicans are constantly bitching about the government's inability to do anything. But, when it comes to new citizens that are not born into this country, well they somehow believe that in that area the government is completely competent. Yep, the government can pick and choose it's citizens. The founders would be appalled.

Now the founders had a resolution for this issue.
It is in the Preamble to the Constitution...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble

The "common defense" means protecting Americans from people that don't want to become Americans, follow American Laws, wave their home country's flag, disrespect the values that Americans adhere to.

This is not "cognitive dissonance ... which the correct definition in psychology 101 is .
The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
cognitive dissonance | Definition of cognitive dissonance in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

Now there is NO dissonance at play here. GOP/Conservatives don't believe in the following example of the Obama administration forgetting "Common Defense"... specifically that means helping control the air traffic with Air traffic controllers.
The FAA under Obama decided that there wasn't enough diversity in the ATCs. So they modified the tests and evaluation criteria.
For example on the exam there are several questions that really beg the question..."what were they thinking of"?
The best answer to the question when was the last time you worked full time: Answer You haven't worked in the past 3 years.
Best answer to this question: Name their worst grade in high school: Answer: Science. Yup the FAA wanted ATCs who couldn't understand "Science".
Another question where the person answered got 5 points was if they knew a great deal about Air traffic control...while if you were a trained pilot... 2 points! Kid you not!
The test as it shows was to screen out people with aviation experience because the workforce was "too white".

Tucker Carlson Tonight 6/1/2018 – Breaking Fox News – June 1, 2018 | BuzzyBuzz

Since 2014, any applicants with aviation degrees or military service are now on equal footing
with people without any experience, because the first step to being hired means passing the questionnaire.

In some cases, applicants with no experience are passing the questionnaire while those with academic training degrees are not, according to the Association of Collegiate Training Institutions, a group of 24 CTI schools lobbying against the FAA’s current hiring policy.

“I have a couple of students who actually were air traffic controllers in the military and failed that test,” said Tom Daly, dean of Dowling College’s School of Aviation, which is one of 36 CTI schools but is not in the lobbying coalition. “How could you be an air traffic controller for five years, very successfully, and fail that test?”

FAA bid to expand air traffic hiring derided

NOW do you understand the position of GOP/Conservatives when for example the Obama administration's FAA rather NOT hire people who had Air traffic controller experiences!
Is that the Federal Government that is also in charge of "IMMIGRATION"? Do you see this gross effort to get diversity at the price of air passengers?

This is the reason for Trump's cleaning house in the government with 24,000 less people working...i.e. doing really dumb things like NOT hiring people with ATC experiences!

Talk about the "Common defense"????

Wow, I will give you credit for creativity, using the common defense clause to defend restrictions on immigration. But you are completely ignoring the Declaration of Independence, which came years before that Constitution. You ignore the inalienable right called "pursuit of happiness". Open borders are absolutely critical to that right. The founders didn't say all men had an inalienable right to pursue their happiness but only within the confines of the country in which they were born.

What most people don't realize is that open borders were then, and are now, the very center of America's exceptionalism. The concept of a "social contract", where rulers were only legitimate when they ruled with the CONSENT of the governed, was a new concept spawned during the Age of Enlightenment. Previously, the concept of feudal obligation was the general belief and rule of the day. Individuals as yourself have reverted to that concept, where one's allegiance is determined by the place of their birth, instead of by their own consent. Where one can be perpetually considered an "alien" in the land in which they choose to live simply because they were born somewhere else is completely contradictory to the ideals of the founders.

 

[Auld Phart]

The far left uses terms like anti-immigration to try and smear anyone that does not believe what they believe.

Being against illegal immigration is not the same as legal immigration, but you can not explain that to a far left drone!

The far left needs the illegals to keep coming in the system, that way they can keep education standards very low in order to accommodate them.

Cognitive dissonance. Republicans are constantly bitching about the government's inability to do anything. But, when it comes to new citizens that are not born into this country, well they somehow believe that in that area the government is completely competent. Yep, the government can pick and choose it's citizens. The founders would be appalled.

Now the founders had a resolution for this issue.
It is in the Preamble to the Constitution...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble

The "common defense" means protecting Americans from people that don't want to become Americans, follow American Laws, wave their home country's flag, disrespect the values that Americans adhere to.

This is not "cognitive dissonance ... which the correct definition in psychology 101 is .
The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
cognitive dissonance | Definition of cognitive dissonance in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

Now there is NO dissonance at play here. GOP/Conservatives don't believe in the following example of the Obama administration forgetting "Common Defense"... specifically that means helping control the air traffic with Air traffic controllers.
The FAA under Obama decided that there wasn't enough diversity in the ATCs. So they modified the tests and evaluation criteria.
For example on the exam there are several questions that really beg the question..."what were they thinking of"?
The best answer to the question when was the last time you worked full time: Answer You haven't worked in the past 3 years.
Best answer to this question: Name their worst grade in high school: Answer: Science. Yup the FAA wanted ATCs who couldn't understand "Science".
Another question where the person answered got 5 points was if they knew a great deal about Air traffic control...while if you were a trained pilot... 2 points! Kid you not!
The test as it shows was to screen out people with aviation experience because the workforce was "too white".

Tucker Carlson Tonight 6/1/2018 – Breaking Fox News – June 1, 2018 | BuzzyBuzz

Since 2014, any applicants with aviation degrees or military service are now on equal footing
with people without any experience, because the first step to being hired means passing the questionnaire.

In some cases, applicants with no experience are passing the questionnaire while those with academic training degrees are not, according to the Association of Collegiate Training Institutions, a group of 24 CTI schools lobbying against the FAA’s current hiring policy.

“I have a couple of students who actually were air traffic controllers in the military and failed that test,” said Tom Daly, dean of Dowling College’s School of Aviation, which is one of 36 CTI schools but is not in the lobbying coalition. “How could you be an air traffic controller for five years, very successfully, and fail that test?”

FAA bid to expand air traffic hiring derided

NOW do you understand the position of GOP/Conservatives when for example the Obama administration's FAA rather NOT hire people who had Air traffic controller experiences!
Is that the Federal Government that is also in charge of "IMMIGRATION"? Do you see this gross effort to get diversity at the price of air passengers?

This is the reason for Trump's cleaning house in the government with 24,000 less people working...i.e. doing really dumb things like NOT hiring people with ATC experiences!

Talk about the "Common defense"????

Wow, I will give you credit for creativity, using the common defense clause to defend restrictions on immigration. But you are completely ignoring the Declaration of Independence, which came years before that Constitution. You ignore the inalienable right called "pursuit of happiness". Open borders are absolutely critical to that right. The founders didn't say all men had an inalienable right to pursue their happiness but only within the confines of the country in which they were born.

What most people don't realize is that open borders were then, and are now, the very center of America's exceptionalism. The concept of a "social contract", where rulers were only legitimate when they ruled with the CONSENT of the governed, was a new concept spawned during the Age of Enlightenment. Previously, the concept of feudal obligation was the general belief and rule of the day. Individuals as yourself have reverted to that concept, where one's allegiance is determined by the place of their birth, instead of by their own consent. Where one can be perpetually considered an "alien" in the land in which they choose to live simply because they were born somewhere else is completely contradictory to the ideals of the founders.

'Immigration Act of 1891 creates the Bureau of Immigration, which falls under the Treasury Department. The act also calls for the deportation of people who entered the country illegally and denies entry for polygamists, the mentally ill, and those with contagious diseases."

Immigration Laws Passed in the U.S.: History and Timeline

 

[candycorn]

The answer to the OP is that Trump and a significant minority of America are anti-immigrant.

they're against people coming in legally?

I am for cutting back on legal immigration--but NOT out of hate/racism/etc

Me too. Good to see someone else has my supposed whacky views....lol

 

[Winston]

No. Trump and most Americans are genuinely Pro-Immigrant. However, most do have a problem with rampant Illegal Immigration. It's out of control. Most know our Immigration System is broken.

Personally, i welcome all Immigrants. But they need to come to my country the legal organized way. They're invited, but they need to respect my country and its laws. And I as a US Citizen, have the right to make that demand. If they don't wanna abide by our laws, they aren't welcome here. It's time for change. We need to end Illegal Immigration once and for all.

So, you believe a government should be able to pick and choose their citizens.

Why not?

Seriously? I mean can you not see the problem? A government that picks and chooses it's citizens is on the path to tyranny. There was a reason that the founders established this country with free and open borders. Founded in the belief of a social contract and "inalienable rights" that did not depend upon "citizenship", like life, liberty, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS free and open borders was primarily a protections against a too powerful government. A kind of check and balance, just like our three branches of government or bicameral legislature. but vastly more important.

The only problem I see is you. Name a country in the world that does not control immigration. Back when this country was founded, it was a vast wilderness devoid of humanity. Today, that is not the case.

I contact people by telephone across the US as a part of my new job. Two areas, on the east coast, one in the midwest and two in the western US. Guess how often I speak to someone fluent in English in those two western areas? The phones greetings for the voicemail are in Spanish, and if I talk to anyone over the age of 20, they usually do not speak English at all. I am supposed to believe these are all US citizens?

Are you seriously telling me that these people do not impact our society and our government? I am also certain that other groups in other eastern cities have the same concentrations of "illegals".

I have nothing against Hispanics as two of my three children married spouses with that ethnicity, so don't try the "race card".

Those borders allow us to control who comes in and we can do a much better job in all aspects of immigration, but to allow the government to abandon their responsibilities.

It often amazes me that the same people that will spout about how great America is, how there is no other country on earth like the United States, that talk about American exceptionalism will, at the drop of a hat, make a stupid ass statement like, "Name a country in the world". What, do we want America to be like all those other countries? Do we bury the idea of American exceptionalism? Honestly, it is childish, like the kid that goes, "but all the other kids do it". I can tell you, mine only spouted off that nonsense once because it was a really quick path to Pop's rage. I didn't raise my kids to be "like everyone else" and I sure as hell don't want my country to be like all those other countries.

And although it should not be a partisan issue, if Democrats want these immigrants as potential illegal voters then does it not follow that Republicans simply want to limit those that vote? Does that help you understand the problem? Again, a government that can decide who can and cannot vote is soon a tryanny. And the "theme" of the founding of America was the protection of the people from the government, NOT the protection of the government from the people.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Much of the GOP wants them as cheap labor, Winston.

 

[candycorn]

Well here is the history of how Americans feel about immigrants through the years:

It lifted my spirits to see the Food, music and arts results from about a year ago....
Good sign for the future.


More at...
Gallup.org.

 

[healthmyths]

The far left uses terms like anti-immigration to try and smear anyone that does not believe what they believe.

Being against illegal immigration is not the same as legal immigration, but you can not explain that to a far left drone!

The far left needs the illegals to keep coming in the system, that way they can keep education standards very low in order to accommodate them.

Cognitive dissonance. Republicans are constantly bitching about the government's inability to do anything. But, when it comes to new citizens that are not born into this country, well they somehow believe that in that area the government is completely competent. Yep, the government can pick and choose it's citizens. The founders would be appalled.

Now the founders had a resolution for this issue.
It is in the Preamble to the Constitution...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble

The "common defense" means protecting Americans from people that don't want to become Americans, follow American Laws, wave their home country's flag, disrespect the values that Americans adhere to.

This is not "cognitive dissonance ... which the correct definition in psychology 101 is .
The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
cognitive dissonance | Definition of cognitive dissonance in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

Now there is NO dissonance at play here. GOP/Conservatives don't believe in the following example of the Obama administration forgetting "Common Defense"... specifically that means helping control the air traffic with Air traffic controllers.
The FAA under Obama decided that there wasn't enough diversity in the ATCs. So they modified the tests and evaluation criteria.
For example on the exam there are several questions that really beg the question..."what were they thinking of"?
The best answer to the question when was the last time you worked full time: Answer You haven't worked in the past 3 years.
Best answer to this question: Name their worst grade in high school: Answer: Science. Yup the FAA wanted ATCs who couldn't understand "Science".
Another question where the person answered got 5 points was if they knew a great deal about Air traffic control...while if you were a trained pilot... 2 points! Kid you not!
The test as it shows was to screen out people with aviation experience because the workforce was "too white".

Tucker Carlson Tonight 6/1/2018 – Breaking Fox News – June 1, 2018 | BuzzyBuzz

Since 2014, any applicants with aviation degrees or military service are now on equal footing
with people without any experience, because the first step to being hired means passing the questionnaire.

In some cases, applicants with no experience are passing the questionnaire while those with academic training degrees are not, according to the Association of Collegiate Training Institutions, a group of 24 CTI schools lobbying against the FAA’s current hiring policy.

“I have a couple of students who actually were air traffic controllers in the military and failed that test,” said Tom Daly, dean of Dowling College’s School of Aviation, which is one of 36 CTI schools but is not in the lobbying coalition. “How could you be an air traffic controller for five years, very successfully, and fail that test?”

FAA bid to expand air traffic hiring derided

NOW do you understand the position of GOP/Conservatives when for example the Obama administration's FAA rather NOT hire people who had Air traffic controller experiences!
Is that the Federal Government that is also in charge of "IMMIGRATION"? Do you see this gross effort to get diversity at the price of air passengers?

This is the reason for Trump's cleaning house in the government with 24,000 less people working...i.e. doing really dumb things like NOT hiring people with ATC experiences!

Talk about the "Common defense"????

Wow, I will give you credit for creativity, using the common defense clause to defend restrictions on immigration. But you are completely ignoring the Declaration of Independence, which came years before that Constitution. You ignore the inalienable right called "pursuit of happiness". Open borders are absolutely critical to that right. The founders didn't say all men had an inalienable right to pursue their happiness but only within the confines of the country in which they were born.

What most people don't realize is that open borders were then, and are now, the very center of America's exceptionalism. The concept of a "social contract", where rulers were only legitimate when they ruled with the CONSENT of the governed, was a new concept spawned during the Age of Enlightenment. Previously, the concept of feudal obligation was the general belief and rule of the day. Individuals as yourself have reverted to that concept, where one's allegiance is determined by the place of their birth, instead of by their own consent. Where one can be perpetually considered an "alien" in the land in which they choose to live simply because they were born somewhere else is completely contradictory to the ideals of the founders.

So which is more likely be responsible for the other? Or is it possible to "pursue happiness" if the "common defense" is not provided? I mean this is not a chicken or the egg i.e. which came first. "Pursuit of happiness" depends on the "common defense".
And that is never more evident than in South Texas.
Ask the residents near the border if they can "pursue happiness" not knowing who that person wandering on their land is because there is no "common defense".

• The Western District of Texas had the nation’s most significant crime rate with over 6,300 cases filed; followed by the Southern District of Texas with slightly over 6,000 cases.

• That same year, the U.S. Sentencing Commission found that 75 percent of all criminal defendants who were convicted and sentenced for federal drug offenses were illegal immigrants. Illegal immigrants were also involved in 17 percent of all drug trafficking sentences and one third of all federal prison sentences

• According to the FBI, 67,642 murders were committed in the U.S. from 2005 through 2008, and 115,717 from 2003 through 2009. The General Accounting Office documents that criminal immigrants committed 25,064 of these murders.

• Recent crime analysis by both the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Texas law enforcement authorities indicate that between June 2011 and March 2017, over 217,000 criminal immigrants were arrested and booked into Texas jails.

• In researching the criminal careers of these defendants, it was revealed that they had jointly committed over nearly 600,000 criminal offenses. Their arrests included nearly 1,200 homicides; almost 69,000 assaults; 16,854 burglaries; 700 kidnappings; nearly 6,200 sexual assaults; 69,000 drug offenses; 8,700 weapons violations; over 3,800 robberies and over 45,000 obstructing police charges. In determining the status of these offenders in the U.S., it was confirmed by DHS that over 173,000 or 66 percent of these immigrant criminal defendants were in our country illegally at the times of their arrests

The truth about crime, illegal immigrants and sanctuary cities

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The far left uses terms like anti-immigration to try and smear anyone that does not believe what they believe.

Being against illegal immigration is not the same as legal immigration, but you can not explain that to a far left drone!

The far left needs the illegals to keep coming in the system, that way they can keep education standards very low in order to accommodate them.

Cognitive dissonance. Republicans are constantly bitching about the government's inability to do anything. But, when it comes to new citizens that are not born into this country, well they somehow believe that in that area the government is completely competent. Yep, the government can pick and choose it's citizens. The founders would be appalled.

Now the founders had a resolution for this issue.
It is in the Preamble to the Constitution...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble

The "common defense" means protecting Americans from people that don't want to become Americans, follow American Laws, wave their home country's flag, disrespect the values that Americans adhere to.

This is not "cognitive dissonance ... which the correct definition in psychology 101 is .
The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
cognitive dissonance | Definition of cognitive dissonance in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

Now there is NO dissonance at play here. GOP/Conservatives don't believe in the following example of the Obama administration forgetting "Common Defense"... specifically that means helping control the air traffic with Air traffic controllers.
The FAA under Obama decided that there wasn't enough diversity in the ATCs. So they modified the tests and evaluation criteria.
For example on the exam there are several questions that really beg the question..."what were they thinking of"?
The best answer to the question when was the last time you worked full time: Answer You haven't worked in the past 3 years.
Best answer to this question: Name their worst grade in high school: Answer: Science. Yup the FAA wanted ATCs who couldn't understand "Science".
Another question where the person answered got 5 points was if they knew a great deal about Air traffic control...while if you were a trained pilot... 2 points! Kid you not!
The test as it shows was to screen out people with aviation experience because the workforce was "too white".

Tucker Carlson Tonight 6/1/2018 – Breaking Fox News – June 1, 2018 | BuzzyBuzz

Since 2014, any applicants with aviation degrees or military service are now on equal footing
with people without any experience, because the first step to being hired means passing the questionnaire.

In some cases, applicants with no experience are passing the questionnaire while those with academic training degrees are not, according to the Association of Collegiate Training Institutions, a group of 24 CTI schools lobbying against the FAA’s current hiring policy.

“I have a couple of students who actually were air traffic controllers in the military and failed that test,” said Tom Daly, dean of Dowling College’s School of Aviation, which is one of 36 CTI schools but is not in the lobbying coalition. “How could you be an air traffic controller for five years, very successfully, and fail that test?”

FAA bid to expand air traffic hiring derided

NOW do you understand the position of GOP/Conservatives when for example the Obama administration's FAA rather NOT hire people who had Air traffic controller experiences!
Is that the Federal Government that is also in charge of "IMMIGRATION"? Do you see this gross effort to get diversity at the price of air passengers?

This is the reason for Trump's cleaning house in the government with 24,000 less people working...i.e. doing really dumb things like NOT hiring people with ATC experiences!

Talk about the "Common defense"????

Wow, I will give you credit for creativity, using the common defense clause to defend restrictions on immigration. But you are completely ignoring the Declaration of Independence, which came years before that Constitution. You ignore the inalienable right called "pursuit of happiness". Open borders are absolutely critical to that right. The founders didn't say all men had an inalienable right to pursue their happiness but only within the confines of the country in which they were born.

What most people don't realize is that open borders were then, and are now, the very center of America's exceptionalism. The concept of a "social contract", where rulers were only legitimate when they ruled with the CONSENT of the governed, was a new concept spawned during the Age of Enlightenment. Previously, the concept of feudal obligation was the general belief and rule of the day. Individuals as yourself have reverted to that concept, where one's allegiance is determined by the place of their birth, instead of by their own consent. Where one can be perpetually considered an "alien" in the land in which they choose to live simply because they were born somewhere else is completely contradictory to the ideals of the founders.

Utter bullshit for which you have no supporting evidence. America in the 1780s and America today are not the same. That is why the Constitution gave Congress powers over immigration, or did you intentionally ignore that part of the Constitution because it is inconvenient?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

No. Trump and most Americans are genuinely Pro-Immigrant. However, most do have a problem with rampant Illegal Immigration. It's out of control. Most know our Immigration System is broken.

Personally, i welcome all Immigrants. But they need to come to my country the legal organized way. They're invited, but they need to respect my country and its laws. And I as a US Citizen, have the right to make that demand. If they don't wanna abide by our laws, they aren't welcome here. It's time for change. We need to end Illegal Immigration once and for all.

So, you believe a government should be able to pick and choose their citizens.

Why not?

Seriously? I mean can you not see the problem? A government that picks and chooses it's citizens is on the path to tyranny. There was a reason that the founders established this country with free and open borders. Founded in the belief of a social contract and "inalienable rights" that did not depend upon "citizenship", like life, liberty, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS free and open borders was primarily a protections against a too powerful government. A kind of check and balance, just like our three branches of government or bicameral legislature. but vastly more important.

The only problem I see is you. Name a country in the world that does not control immigration. Back when this country was founded, it was a vast wilderness devoid of humanity. Today, that is not the case.

I contact people by telephone across the US as a part of my new job. Two areas, on the east coast, one in the midwest and two in the western US. Guess how often I speak to someone fluent in English in those two western areas? The phones greetings for the voicemail are in Spanish, and if I talk to anyone over the age of 20, they usually do not speak English at all. I am supposed to believe these are all US citizens?

Are you seriously telling me that these people do not impact our society and our government? I am also certain that other groups in other eastern cities have the same concentrations of "illegals".

I have nothing against Hispanics as two of my three children married spouses with that ethnicity, so don't try the "race card".

Those borders allow us to control who comes in and we can do a much better job in all aspects of immigration, but to allow the government to abandon their responsibilities.

It often amazes me that the same people that will spout about how great America is, how there is no other country on earth like the United States, that talk about American exceptionalism will, at the drop of a hat, make a stupid ass statement like, "Name a country in the world". What, do we want America to be like all those other countries? Do we bury the idea of American exceptionalism? Honestly, it is childish, like the kid that goes, "but all the other kids do it". I can tell you, mine only spouted off that nonsense once because it was a really quick path to Pop's rage. I didn't raise my kids to be "like everyone else" and I sure as hell don't want my country to be like all those other countries.

And although it should not be a partisan issue, if Democrats want these immigrants as potential illegal voters then does it not follow that Republicans simply want to limit those that vote? Does that help you understand the problem? Again, a government that can decide who can and cannot vote is soon a tryanny. And the "theme" of the founding of America was the protection of the people from the government, NOT the protection of the government from the people.

Because you have no legitimate response, you just claim that I am wrong. Great debate tactics, dumbass!

Pardon me, but your middle school level education is showing brightly!

 

[Winston]

The far left uses terms like anti-immigration to try and smear anyone that does not believe what they believe.

Being against illegal immigration is not the same as legal immigration, but you can not explain that to a far left drone!

The far left needs the illegals to keep coming in the system, that way they can keep education standards very low in order to accommodate them.

Cognitive dissonance. Republicans are constantly bitching about the government's inability to do anything. But, when it comes to new citizens that are not born into this country, well they somehow believe that in that area the government is completely competent. Yep, the government can pick and choose it's citizens. The founders would be appalled.

Now the founders had a resolution for this issue.
It is in the Preamble to the Constitution...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble

The "common defense" means protecting Americans from people that don't want to become Americans, follow American Laws, wave their home country's flag, disrespect the values that Americans adhere to.

This is not "cognitive dissonance ... which the correct definition in psychology 101 is .
The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
cognitive dissonance | Definition of cognitive dissonance in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

Now there is NO dissonance at play here. GOP/Conservatives don't believe in the following example of the Obama administration forgetting "Common Defense"... specifically that means helping control the air traffic with Air traffic controllers.
The FAA under Obama decided that there wasn't enough diversity in the ATCs. So they modified the tests and evaluation criteria.
For example on the exam there are several questions that really beg the question..."what were they thinking of"?
The best answer to the question when was the last time you worked full time: Answer You haven't worked in the past 3 years.
Best answer to this question: Name their worst grade in high school: Answer: Science. Yup the FAA wanted ATCs who couldn't understand "Science".
Another question where the person answered got 5 points was if they knew a great deal about Air traffic control...while if you were a trained pilot... 2 points! Kid you not!
The test as it shows was to screen out people with aviation experience because the workforce was "too white".

Tucker Carlson Tonight 6/1/2018 – Breaking Fox News – June 1, 2018 | BuzzyBuzz

Since 2014, any applicants with aviation degrees or military service are now on equal footing
with people without any experience, because the first step to being hired means passing the questionnaire.

In some cases, applicants with no experience are passing the questionnaire while those with academic training degrees are not, according to the Association of Collegiate Training Institutions, a group of 24 CTI schools lobbying against the FAA’s current hiring policy.

“I have a couple of students who actually were air traffic controllers in the military and failed that test,” said Tom Daly, dean of Dowling College’s School of Aviation, which is one of 36 CTI schools but is not in the lobbying coalition. “How could you be an air traffic controller for five years, very successfully, and fail that test?”

FAA bid to expand air traffic hiring derided

NOW do you understand the position of GOP/Conservatives when for example the Obama administration's FAA rather NOT hire people who had Air traffic controller experiences!
Is that the Federal Government that is also in charge of "IMMIGRATION"? Do you see this gross effort to get diversity at the price of air passengers?

This is the reason for Trump's cleaning house in the government with 24,000 less people working...i.e. doing really dumb things like NOT hiring people with ATC experiences!

Talk about the "Common defense"????

Wow, I will give you credit for creativity, using the common defense clause to defend restrictions on immigration. But you are completely ignoring the Declaration of Independence, which came years before that Constitution. You ignore the inalienable right called "pursuit of happiness". Open borders are absolutely critical to that right. The founders didn't say all men had an inalienable right to pursue their happiness but only within the confines of the country in which they were born.

What most people don't realize is that open borders were then, and are now, the very center of America's exceptionalism. The concept of a "social contract", where rulers were only legitimate when they ruled with the CONSENT of the governed, was a new concept spawned during the Age of Enlightenment. Previously, the concept of feudal obligation was the general belief and rule of the day. Individuals as yourself have reverted to that concept, where one's allegiance is determined by the place of their birth, instead of by their own consent. Where one can be perpetually considered an "alien" in the land in which they choose to live simply because they were born somewhere else is completely contradictory to the ideals of the founders.

Utter bullshit for which you have no supporting evidence. America in the 1780s and America today are not the same. That is why the Constitution gave Congress powers over immigration, or did you intentionally ignore that part of the Constitution because it is inconvenient?

No, the Constitution did not even mention "immigration". It only discusses "naturalization". As to supporting evidence, perhaps after you have spent a couple of years actually study history the right way, by putting on white gloves and digging through historical documents, you would understand. But, if you don't know anything about the Age of Enlightenment, don't know about the old concept of feudal obligation, misunderstand the whole social contract thing, you probably are not going to understand. I don't need to post any evidence you stupid shit. Hell, you have some contradictory translations to the social contract and feudal obligation concepts? Is my explanation of them wrong? Does not claiming foreign born residents of this country have an "obligation" to their former country just an old re-hash of the feudal obligation concept and does not a "social contract" inherently imply that people have a "choice" as to whom they are governed by?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The far left uses terms like anti-immigration to try and smear anyone that does not believe what they believe.

Being against illegal immigration is not the same as legal immigration, but you can not explain that to a far left drone!

The far left needs the illegals to keep coming in the system, that way they can keep education standards very low in order to accommodate them.

Cognitive dissonance. Republicans are constantly bitching about the government's inability to do anything. But, when it comes to new citizens that are not born into this country, well they somehow believe that in that area the government is completely competent. Yep, the government can pick and choose it's citizens. The founders would be appalled.

Now the founders had a resolution for this issue.
It is in the Preamble to the Constitution...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
Preamble

The "common defense" means protecting Americans from people that don't want to become Americans, follow American Laws, wave their home country's flag, disrespect the values that Americans adhere to.

This is not "cognitive dissonance ... which the correct definition in psychology 101 is .
The state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change.
cognitive dissonance | Definition of cognitive dissonance in US English by Oxford Dictionaries

Now there is NO dissonance at play here. GOP/Conservatives don't believe in the following example of the Obama administration forgetting "Common Defense"... specifically that means helping control the air traffic with Air traffic controllers.
The FAA under Obama decided that there wasn't enough diversity in the ATCs. So they modified the tests and evaluation criteria.
For example on the exam there are several questions that really beg the question..."what were they thinking of"?
The best answer to the question when was the last time you worked full time: Answer You haven't worked in the past 3 years.
Best answer to this question: Name their worst grade in high school: Answer: Science. Yup the FAA wanted ATCs who couldn't understand "Science".
Another question where the person answered got 5 points was if they knew a great deal about Air traffic control...while if you were a trained pilot... 2 points! Kid you not!
The test as it shows was to screen out people with aviation experience because the workforce was "too white".

Tucker Carlson Tonight 6/1/2018 – Breaking Fox News – June 1, 2018 | BuzzyBuzz

Since 2014, any applicants with aviation degrees or military service are now on equal footing
with people without any experience, because the first step to being hired means passing the questionnaire.

In some cases, applicants with no experience are passing the questionnaire while those with academic training degrees are not, according to the Association of Collegiate Training Institutions, a group of 24 CTI schools lobbying against the FAA’s current hiring policy.

“I have a couple of students who actually were air traffic controllers in the military and failed that test,” said Tom Daly, dean of Dowling College’s School of Aviation, which is one of 36 CTI schools but is not in the lobbying coalition. “How could you be an air traffic controller for five years, very successfully, and fail that test?”

FAA bid to expand air traffic hiring derided

NOW do you understand the position of GOP/Conservatives when for example the Obama administration's FAA rather NOT hire people who had Air traffic controller experiences!
Is that the Federal Government that is also in charge of "IMMIGRATION"? Do you see this gross effort to get diversity at the price of air passengers?

This is the reason for Trump's cleaning house in the government with 24,000 less people working...i.e. doing really dumb things like NOT hiring people with ATC experiences!

Talk about the "Common defense"????

Wow, I will give you credit for creativity, using the common defense clause to defend restrictions on immigration. But you are completely ignoring the Declaration of Independence, which came years before that Constitution. You ignore the inalienable right called "pursuit of happiness". Open borders are absolutely critical to that right. The founders didn't say all men had an inalienable right to pursue their happiness but only within the confines of the country in which they were born.

What most people don't realize is that open borders were then, and are now, the very center of America's exceptionalism. The concept of a "social contract", where rulers were only legitimate when they ruled with the CONSENT of the governed, was a new concept spawned during the Age of Enlightenment. Previously, the concept of feudal obligation was the general belief and rule of the day. Individuals as yourself have reverted to that concept, where one's allegiance is determined by the place of their birth, instead of by their own consent. Where one can be perpetually considered an "alien" in the land in which they choose to live simply because they were born somewhere else is completely contradictory to the ideals of the founders.

Utter bullshit for which you have no supporting evidence. America in the 1780s and America today are not the same. That is why the Constitution gave Congress powers over immigration, or did you intentionally ignore that part of the Constitution because it is inconvenient?

No, the Constitution did not even mention "immigration". It only discusses "naturalization". As to supporting evidence, perhaps after you have spent a couple of years actually study history the right way, by putting on white gloves and digging through historical documents, you would understand. But, if you don't know anything about the Age of Enlightenment, don't know about the old concept of feudal obligation, misunderstand the whole social contract thing, you probably are not going to understand. I don't need to post any evidence you stupid shit. Hell, you have some contradictory translations to the social contract and feudal obligation concepts? Is my explanation of them wrong? Does not claiming foreign born residents of this country have an "obligation" to their former country just an old re-hash of the feudal obligation concept and does not a "social contract" inherently imply that people have a "choice" as to whom they are governed by?

I have a degree in history and taught it for over 20 years. You are so full of shit your eyes are brown.

Immigration is required before naturalization, dumbass!

 

[talksalot]

It's not really about immigrants; it's about lawlessness.

Americans are sick of the eight years of lawlessness allowed and encouraged by Democrats looking to build their voting base with illegals and refugees.

Lawlessness that has also encouraged violence against police officers and kept them from doing their job.

Seal the border. Round up the illegals and send them back where they came from. End chain migration. Stop the flow of refugees.

Let in people who go through the legal channels.

It's quite simple and I think this is what the majority of Americans want: Respect Our Laws!

 

[harmonica]

this is not 1850 or 1950 anymore...much has changed..it's as simple as that

 

[jc456]

I've commented several times about the perfect example of the MSM bias is when doing a search on the term
"Trump anti-immigrant" I'd post this most recent done just moments ago.
Note the absence of a key adjective.
A very important adjective considering:
1) Because the United States is a settler society, the vast majority of Americans can trace their ancestry to immigrants from other nations.
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia

2) That Trump's wife is a "LEGAL" immigrant.

That glaring omission is the term "ILLEGAL".
The only reason the MSM has fostered this "Trump anti-immigrant" statement is because they are biased.
MSNBC is certainly not the "journalistic" when they run a headline:"When Trump's anti-immigrant fear..."

So explain to me and the "VAST Majority of Americans" and Trump with a legal immigrant wife can be
"anti-immigrant"?

What most of us with relatives who are immediate "Legal immigrants" as well as Trump find dishonest is that "Legal immigrants" in almost all cases are abiding by the requirements that are actually less rigid then those who are "illegal immigrants" have had to suffer. I.e. drug cartel coyotes $3,000 - $4,000 per person to illegally enter.
Human smuggling fees

So why is the MSM portraying the "VAST majority of Americans" and Trump as being "anti-immigrants" when the MSM should be DISCOURAGING the coyotes smuggling efforts by at least using the phrase "America's
ANTI-ILLEGAL Immigrants"? By working against "Trump's Anti-Illegal-immigrants" efforts at the minimum the
MSM is ENCOURAGING billions of dollars lining the drug cartels that have found human smuggling more profitable than drug smuggling! All because the MSM hates Trump and a "vast majority of Americans" more than the MSM truly cares for people that WANT to come to America LEGALLY!




View attachment 196294

Let me help you out. One should not use the term "illegal immigrant" as some kind of blanket condemnation of all unauthorized immigrants. Almost half of all those undocumented immigrants got here just like Melania, and now that I think of it, Arnold Schwarzenegger, did, on a tourist visa. And overstaying a tourist visa is not a crime. It is a civil violation. I mean we don't call speeders "illegal drivers, why would we call those that overstay their tourist visa an illegal alien?

But, if one breaks a federal law, like say--working for money while on a tourist Visa, like both Melania and Arnold did, then they might could be called illegal alien. You can't make the claim that Melania is a "legal immigrant" when she, unlike almost half of all those people that you do call illegal immigrants, never broke a federal law. You have to call Melania, and Arnold, illegal aliens. They came here on a tourist visa, but instead of overstaying that visa, they actually violated federal law.

Huh?

 

[jc456]

Republicans are anti-brown people.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Huh?

 

[jc456]

Republicans are anti-brown people.

Sent from my SM-J727VPP using Tapatalk

Republicans are for law and order...they are anti-criminal.
Mexicrats hate law and order and encourage criminality.

Look at their country! Nough said

 

[jc456]

I've commented several times about the perfect example of the MSM bias is when doing a search on the term
"Trump anti-immigrant" I'd post this most recent done just moments ago.
Note the absence of a key adjective.
A very important adjective considering:
1) Because the United States is a settler society, the vast majority of Americans can trace their ancestry to immigrants from other nations.
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia

2) That Trump's wife is a "LEGAL" immigrant.

That glaring omission is the term "ILLEGAL".
The only reason the MSM has fostered this "Trump anti-immigrant" statement is because they are biased.
MSNBC is certainly not the "journalistic" when they run a headline:"When Trump's anti-immigrant fear..."

So explain to me and the "VAST Majority of Americans" and Trump with a legal immigrant wife can be
"anti-immigrant"?

What most of us with relatives who are immediate "Legal immigrants" as well as Trump find dishonest is that "Legal immigrants" in almost all cases are abiding by the requirements that are actually less rigid then those who are "illegal immigrants" have had to suffer. I.e. drug cartel coyotes $3,000 - $4,000 per person to illegally enter.
Human smuggling fees

So why is the MSM portraying the "VAST majority of Americans" and Trump as being "anti-immigrants" when the MSM should be DISCOURAGING the coyotes smuggling efforts by at least using the phrase "America's
ANTI-ILLEGAL Immigrants"? By working against "Trump's Anti-Illegal-immigrants" efforts at the minimum the
MSM is ENCOURAGING billions of dollars lining the drug cartels that have found human smuggling more profitable than drug smuggling! All because the MSM hates Trump and a "vast majority of Americans" more than the MSM truly cares for people that WANT to come to America LEGALLY!




View attachment 196294

Trump supporters like immigrants, as long as they're white, or at least look white.

 

[jc456]

I've commented several times about the perfect example of the MSM bias is when doing a search on the term
"Trump anti-immigrant" I'd post this most recent done just moments ago.
Note the absence of a key adjective.
A very important adjective considering:
1) Because the United States is a settler society, the vast majority of Americans can trace their ancestry to immigrants from other nations.
Immigration to the United States - Wikipedia

2) That Trump's wife is a "LEGAL" immigrant.

That glaring omission is the term "ILLEGAL".
The only reason the MSM has fostered this "Trump anti-immigrant" statement is because they are biased.
MSNBC is certainly not the "journalistic" when they run a headline:"When Trump's anti-immigrant fear..."

So explain to me and the "VAST Majority of Americans" and Trump with a legal immigrant wife can be
"anti-immigrant"?

What most of us with relatives who are immediate "Legal immigrants" as well as Trump find dishonest is that "Legal immigrants" in almost all cases are abiding by the requirements that are actually less rigid then those who are "illegal immigrants" have had to suffer. I.e. drug cartel coyotes $3,000 - $4,000 per person to illegally enter.
Human smuggling fees

So why is the MSM portraying the "VAST majority of Americans" and Trump as being "anti-immigrants" when the MSM should be DISCOURAGING the coyotes smuggling efforts by at least using the phrase "America's
ANTI-ILLEGAL Immigrants"? By working against "Trump's Anti-Illegal-immigrants" efforts at the minimum the
MSM is ENCOURAGING billions of dollars lining the drug cartels that have found human smuggling more profitable than drug smuggling! All because the MSM hates Trump and a "vast majority of Americans" more than the MSM truly cares for people that WANT to come to America LEGALLY!




View attachment 196294

Let me help you out. One should not use the term "illegal immigrant" as some kind of blanket condemnation of all unauthorized immigrants. Almost half of all those undocumented immigrants got here just like Melania, and now that I think of it, Arnold Schwarzenegger, did, on a tourist visa. And overstaying a tourist visa is not a crime. It is a civil violation. I mean we don't call speeders "illegal drivers, why would we call those that overstay their tourist visa an illegal alien?

But, if one breaks a federal law, like say--working for money while on a tourist Visa, like both Melania and Arnold did, then they might could be called illegal alien. You can't make the claim that Melania is a "legal immigrant" when she, unlike almost half of all those people that you do call illegal immigrants, never broke a federal law. You have to call Melania, and Arnold, illegal aliens. They came here on a tourist visa, but instead of overstaying that visa, they actually violated federal law.

And overstaying a tourist visa is not a crime. It is a civil violation.

there ya have it folks


a crime is not a crime.

Well, I suppose trying to explain the difference between a criminal offense and a civil offense to someone with a sixth grade education and their head stuck up their ass would be futile.

I'm in my late 60s, with FAR more than a sixth grade education.

feel free to continue sticking your foot in your mouth

Well then, did you never learn the difference between breaking a law and violating a civil statue? If you drive 65 in a 55 mph zone, are you breaking the law? Are speeders criminals? In all those years you have been around, have you had a ticket, parking, speeding, littering. Have you ever paid a fine, been late on your taxes, or violated a local ordinance? Are you a criminal?

If you don’t pay the bill, yep