Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I thought CONservatives ALREADY decided the "papers please" movement was OK Bubba
Since YOU are NEVER going to get honest, I'm done replying to your nonsense on this
ONCE MORE:
I get it Bubba, you being the typical dishonest right wing liar, can't recognize the EMPLOYERS CHOOSE NOT TO USE THINGS LIKE EVERIFY, SO THEY CAN HIRE PEOPLE NOT AUTHORIZED TO WORK IN THE USA, AND YOU SUPPORT THEM BREAKING THE LAW, BECAUSE THEY ARE "JOB CREATORS" lol
As has been pointed out to you REPEATEDLY in these topics, "job creators" CONTINUALLY use Gov't policy to evade the law "legally" by capturing Gov't and their policy makers!
What part of "mandatory" didn't you understand?
Better talk to the GOP Plutocrats Bubba, including the Chamber who say you are nuts!
There's a reason we call it the "Chamber of Crony Capitalism." The chamber is populated with Establishment RINOs. Conservatives laugh at it.
The fact that the "plutocrats" oppose it is the reason not to make E-verify mandatory? Since when did Dims start taking orders from plutocrats? Oh, yeah . . . . . they always have.
Oh you mean the 20% of America who follow CONservatives like Rushblo or Insannity?
Sorry Bubba, YOU and your ilk are done in America, time to go back to being the Birchers hiding in the closet1!
No, I mean the majority of all Americans. They are fed up with illegal immigration.
so, you didn't read what I posted.actually except for certain exemptions like age or a mental issue keeping them from learning English, It is a requirement for citizenship...........So you won't answer my question?
How are we to draw up policies if we don't define these variables going in? If we are going to punish employers for not knowing someone is illegal, which I don't agree with by the way, we need to at least define what lengths they can go to in determining such a thing on the basis of their judgement and assumptions. Because, if we can't establish this beforehand, it leaves the employer subject to all sorts of lawsuits for violating rights to privacy or just plain racial discrimination.
From what you posted, it sounds like you're saying it would be okay to profile people on the basis of whether they speak English. Is THAT what you want to do?
anyone that is in the working age would know at least basic English in order to be legal. So, in short if Juan comes in looking for a job and he is between the ages of 18 and 54 and cant speak English, he is not a legal citizen.
I think that clears it up.
Well no, not really... Juan could have been raised in a home where everyone spoke Spanish his entire life and that was what he had learned to speak. Or maybe Juan is embarrassed by speaking in English? What if Juan is 50 or older and lived here 20 years? None of these possibilities can be dismissed because if you denied employment to a legal citizen on the basis you assumed they are illegal, you have to be able to back up your assumption in court if they sue you... which, they will.
So AGAIN I ask... Do you favor profiling an individual on the basis of their ability to speak English? And should we assume that all persons unable to speak English are illegal aliens? Because, if not... you can't expect employers to be responsible for unknowingly hiring illegal aliens.
you were answered there. If Juan is between the ages of 18 and 54 and does not speak English, Juan is illegal and does not qualify to work in this country.
I'm done replying to your nonsense on this
ONCE MORE:...I get it Bubba...
Yepp, you get it, Bubba... You get that great big jar of Vaseline and apply it to your stinging liberal asshole where you just got butt-raped by your Boss with your own stupid point. That's what YOU get!
Sure Bubba, sure. I've personally spanked you soooo many times, I'm shocked some posters haven't called the cops on me for abuse of the dumb and mentally handicapped!
No, you lying piece of shit ass-hole. I do not support open borders. The reason we have illegal immigration is because the river is not being guarded. And even in the few places where it is, our POS president has ordered ICE to invite them in instead of turn them away. It's not because we need to replace the river border with a wall border ya dumb ass. What part of we are ARMING MEXICAN CARTELS and defending their practice of selling us drugs has you all confused?Note the GUARD TOWERs. Without human presence a wall is just a joke. FYI we have a river that already introduces a fairly decent barrier to cross. All we need is man power in towers to watch over the river. We don't need a wall.Walls do a great job of keeping suicide bombers out of Israel.
Yes, LET'S US LIVE LIKE ISRAEL, *shaking head*
Don't usually like this source, but even a clock is correct twice a day
The border wall Donald Trump wants (mostly) exists.
Newsflash to both Donald Trump and Ann Coulter: that wall you’re saying the U.S. needs to build along its border with Mexico…it mostly exists. There aren’t any lasers, a shark-filled moat, or auto-turrets, but it’s there. Don’t believe me? Here it is in Mexicali, California.
And Arizona.
And New Mexico.
The New Mexico part of the fence might seem a little haphazard, but it’s important to realize how the terrain is. The way the mountains are, it really doesn’t make sense to put a big fence up. No one is (or should) going to try to sneak into the country that way. It’s just too dangerous and probably a development nightmare for builders. There’s also this fence in the Sonoran Desert which marks the U.S.-Mexico border.
So why the smaller fence? A part of it has to do with how dangerous the desert is. It’s the climate. The Sonoran Desert is, well, a desert, with blistering heat, mountains, and very little water. When the wall was built in the mid-to-late 2000’s there was no point in building a massive structure because the desert is supposed to be a natural deterrent. It makes no sense to try to cross over through a desert which would probably lead to your death. The Arizona Republic talked to a Border Patrol spokesperson last year who confirmed how dangerous it was.
“It’s the harshest climate along the U.S.-Mexico border. When you’ve got over 30 days of 100-degree weather, that makes it deadly for anybody crossing out there.”
Which is pretty much why coyotes were using this desert to get into the U.S. There aren’t a ton of humans there, which is why the cartels probably use the route. They’d probably still use the route, even if the fence was a massive structure. Desperate people will go anywhere, just look at the Texas border crossings from last year. The Texas fence is done, but it’s not a wall across the state. A lot of that has to do with topography. There are plenty of forests along the border in West Texas, once you get past El Paso, and barely any roads. Lupe Dempsey told FOX News in 2013 why illegal immigrants tend to avoid West Texas.
“…it pushes the migrants into more remote areas where it is easy to get lost, it is very dangerous.”...
The border wall Donald Trump wants (mostly) exists. « Hot Air
.
You call that a wall? Those are pathetic. Here's a wall:
The wall wasn't build to standards because Democrats in Congress didn't want it built.
Yes, that's right. It needs to be manned. the only people assuming it won't be manned are open-borders assholes like you.
we need the wall. The only reason for objecting to is that you support open borders.
Go fuck fuck yourself
Yes, the germans did use ladders to get men over the walls and barbed wire. You're focusing on tanks here.How did you read my statement about using a "ladder" to go over a wall and hear "TANK?" Are you drunk?Because only dumb asses like the french believe humans won't be able to easily avoid man made obstacles. FYI even Mexicans know how to use ladders.Why does building it in the desert make no sense? Should we build it in Colorado?
"Law enforcement present" can be made to disappear with the stroke of a pen. The wall also reduces the manpower needed at the border. Those who oppose the wall are either dumbasses or open-borders assholes.
I don't think illegals are going to be driving tanks over our border, numskull.
Every excuse I read for not building the wall is dumber than dumb.
Just admit you're one of those open borders assholes.
You mentioned the French, which means the Maginot Line. The Germans didn't use ladders to get by that.
What part of "mandatory" didn't you understand?
Better talk to the GOP Plutocrats Bubba, including the Chamber who say you are nuts!
There's a reason we call it the "Chamber of Crony Capitalism." The chamber is populated with Establishment RINOs. Conservatives laugh at it.
The fact that the "plutocrats" oppose it is the reason not to make E-verify mandatory? Since when did Dims start taking orders from plutocrats? Oh, yeah . . . . . they always have.
Oh you mean the 20% of America who follow CONservatives like Rushblo or Insannity?
Sorry Bubba, YOU and your ilk are done in America, time to go back to being the Birchers hiding in the closet1!
No, I mean the majority of all Americans. They are fed up with illegal immigration.
Why not a solution versus jumping on board with band aid that Trumpster proposes for his low informed base? Oh right, SOLUTIONS are not in the right wing world vocabulary, except to claim them as their own, AFTER progressives did it!
Better talk to the GOP Plutocrats Bubba, including the Chamber who say you are nuts!
There's a reason we call it the "Chamber of Crony Capitalism." The chamber is populated with Establishment RINOs. Conservatives laugh at it.
The fact that the "plutocrats" oppose it is the reason not to make E-verify mandatory? Since when did Dims start taking orders from plutocrats? Oh, yeah . . . . . they always have.
Oh you mean the 20% of America who follow CONservatives like Rushblo or Insannity?
Sorry Bubba, YOU and your ilk are done in America, time to go back to being the Birchers hiding in the closet1!
No, I mean the majority of all Americans. They are fed up with illegal immigration.
Why not a solution versus jumping on board with band aid that Trumpster proposes for his low informed base? Oh right, SOLUTIONS are not in the right wing world vocabulary, except to claim them as their own, AFTER progressives did it!
The wall is a solution. Amnesty is not a solution. That's what Democrats mean whenever they use the word "solution." They mean amnesty. They mean to aggravate the problem, not solve it. Just like the last time they proposed a "solution."
There's a reason we call it the "Chamber of Crony Capitalism." The chamber is populated with Establishment RINOs. Conservatives laugh at it.
The fact that the "plutocrats" oppose it is the reason not to make E-verify mandatory? Since when did Dims start taking orders from plutocrats? Oh, yeah . . . . . they always have.
Oh you mean the 20% of America who follow CONservatives like Rushblo or Insannity?
Sorry Bubba, YOU and your ilk are done in America, time to go back to being the Birchers hiding in the closet1!
No, I mean the majority of all Americans. They are fed up with illegal immigration.
Why not a solution versus jumping on board with band aid that Trumpster proposes for his low informed base? Oh right, SOLUTIONS are not in the right wing world vocabulary, except to claim them as their own, AFTER progressives did it!
The wall is a solution. Amnesty is not a solution. That's what Democrats mean whenever they use the word "solution." They mean amnesty. They mean to aggravate the problem, not solve it. Just like the last time they proposed a "solution."
Sure the wall is a solution, there isn't ladders, visa overstays, etc
Ronald Reagan calls for an open border with Mexico, 1980
"Rather than putting up a fence...
Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration. Ronnie
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=44128
Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. The bill made nearly 3 million illegal immigrants eligible for amnesty
A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants
They pay more taxes in one year than you'll pay in your lifetime. Quit your bitchin'.The rich already pay way more taxes than the average citizen.
But a MUCH smaller percentage of their incomes, ESPECIALLY the super rich fortunate 400 whose tax "burden" is about 20%
The rich already pay way more taxes than the average citizen.
But a MUCH smaller percentage of their incomes, ESPECIALLY the super rich fortunate 400 whose tax "burden" is about 20%
No. Building a wall next to a river IN THE MIDDLE OF NO WHERE is just idiotic. Take your foolish ideas and shove them where the sun doesn't shine. If you want to stop people from crossing all you need to do is put men on the border and FUCKING DO IT. They ARE NOT BEING STOPPED BECAUSE WE HAVE NO ONE ON THE BORDER STOPPING THEM. IT'S NOT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A WALL YOU DUMB ASS.No, you lying piece of shit ass-hole. I do not support open borders. The reason we have illegal immigration is because the river is not being guarded. And even in the few places where it is, our POS president has ordered ICE to invite them in instead of turn them away. It's not because we need to replace the river border with a wall border ya dumb ass. What part of we are ARMING MEXICAN CARTELS and defending their practice of selling us drugs has you all confused?Note the GUARD TOWERs. Without human presence a wall is just a joke. FYI we have a river that already introduces a fairly decent barrier to cross. All we need is man power in towers to watch over the river. We don't need a wall.Yes, LET'S US LIVE LIKE ISRAEL, *shaking head*
Don't usually like this source, but even a clock is correct twice a day
The border wall Donald Trump wants (mostly) exists.
Newsflash to both Donald Trump and Ann Coulter: that wall you’re saying the U.S. needs to build along its border with Mexico…it mostly exists. There aren’t any lasers, a shark-filled moat, or auto-turrets, but it’s there. Don’t believe me? Here it is in Mexicali, California.
And Arizona.
And New Mexico.
The New Mexico part of the fence might seem a little haphazard, but it’s important to realize how the terrain is. The way the mountains are, it really doesn’t make sense to put a big fence up. No one is (or should) going to try to sneak into the country that way. It’s just too dangerous and probably a development nightmare for builders. There’s also this fence in the Sonoran Desert which marks the U.S.-Mexico border.
So why the smaller fence? A part of it has to do with how dangerous the desert is. It’s the climate. The Sonoran Desert is, well, a desert, with blistering heat, mountains, and very little water. When the wall was built in the mid-to-late 2000’s there was no point in building a massive structure because the desert is supposed to be a natural deterrent. It makes no sense to try to cross over through a desert which would probably lead to your death. The Arizona Republic talked to a Border Patrol spokesperson last year who confirmed how dangerous it was.
“It’s the harshest climate along the U.S.-Mexico border. When you’ve got over 30 days of 100-degree weather, that makes it deadly for anybody crossing out there.”
Which is pretty much why coyotes were using this desert to get into the U.S. There aren’t a ton of humans there, which is why the cartels probably use the route. They’d probably still use the route, even if the fence was a massive structure. Desperate people will go anywhere, just look at the Texas border crossings from last year. The Texas fence is done, but it’s not a wall across the state. A lot of that has to do with topography. There are plenty of forests along the border in West Texas, once you get past El Paso, and barely any roads. Lupe Dempsey told FOX News in 2013 why illegal immigrants tend to avoid West Texas.
“…it pushes the migrants into more remote areas where it is easy to get lost, it is very dangerous.”...
The border wall Donald Trump wants (mostly) exists. « Hot Air
.
You call that a wall? Those are pathetic. Here's a wall:
The wall wasn't build to standards because Democrats in Congress didn't want it built.
Yes, that's right. It needs to be manned. the only people assuming it won't be manned are open-borders assholes like you.
we need the wall. The only reason for objecting to is that you support open borders.
Go fuck fuck yourself
If you genuinely supported sealing the borders, you would support building the wall. There simply isn't a good reason for not doing it. All the reasons you have posted are downright stupid. The fact that we have scumbags in office like Obama is even more of a reason to build the wall, because once it's built, it can't be made to disappear with the stroke of a pen. The border guards can't invite anyone when they're sitting in a guard tower or patrolling behind the wall.
If another piece of shit like Obama gets into office, what are you going to do then, ask "pretty please" to seal the border?
There is a BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DEFENDED FENCE AROUND A SMALL MILITARY INSTALLATION AND THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF MILES OF NOTHING BUT TREES WATER AND DIRT. Putting a wall undefended in the middle of fucking no where is fucking idiotic. We don't need a fucking wall we need people on the border given the job of policing the border to keep people out.
We aren't trying to defend against armored divisions, bombers, and artillery. If walls don't keep people on one side of them, then why do we put them around prisons? Why does every U.S. military installation have a chain link fence around it?
The claim that walls don't work is utterly stupid.
The fence will do nothing. Any 5 year old child can circumvent a fence. What is needed is to man the border. Well that an end our welfare state that makes it profitable to come here and take low wage jobs. Charge them 10grand a year for each of their kids to go to an American school. That will slow down the invasion.A border fence is cheaper than increasing patrols. Fence will cost under $20 billion & should last many decades. Increasing the number of agents by 20,000, as is proposed in the Corker-Hoeven amendment, would cost over $3.4 billion a year. Over the next decade, this increase would amount to over $34 billion.
Oh you mean the 20% of America who follow CONservatives like Rushblo or Insannity?
Sorry Bubba, YOU and your ilk are done in America, time to go back to being the Birchers hiding in the closet1!
No, I mean the majority of all Americans. They are fed up with illegal immigration.
Why not a solution versus jumping on board with band aid that Trumpster proposes for his low informed base? Oh right, SOLUTIONS are not in the right wing world vocabulary, except to claim them as their own, AFTER progressives did it!
The wall is a solution. Amnesty is not a solution. That's what Democrats mean whenever they use the word "solution." They mean amnesty. They mean to aggravate the problem, not solve it. Just like the last time they proposed a "solution."
Sure the wall is a solution, there isn't ladders, visa overstays, etc
Ronald Reagan calls for an open border with Mexico, 1980
"Rather than putting up a fence...
Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration. Ronnie
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=44128
Ronald Reagan signed a sweeping immigration reform bill into law. The bill made nearly 3 million illegal immigrants eligible for amnesty
A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants
How is that calling for open borders?
They pay more taxes in one year than you'll pay in your lifetime. Quit your bitchin'.The rich already pay way more taxes than the average citizen.
But a MUCH smaller percentage of their incomes, ESPECIALLY the super rich fortunate 400 whose tax "burden" is about 20%
The rich already pay way more taxes than the average citizen.
But a MUCH smaller percentage of their incomes, ESPECIALLY the super rich fortunate 400 whose tax "burden" is about 20%
That isn't a much smaller percentage, dumbass. Few Americans pay more than that.
The fence will do nothing. Any 5 year old child can circumvent a fence. What is needed is to man the border. Well that an end our welfare state that makes it profitable to come here and take low wage jobs. Charge them 10grand a year for each of their kids to go to an American school. That will slow down the invasion.A border fence is cheaper than increasing patrols. Fence will cost under $20 billion & should last many decades. Increasing the number of agents by 20,000, as is proposed in the Corker-Hoeven amendment, would cost over $3.4 billion a year. Over the next decade, this increase would amount to over $34 billion.
