Why is Building the Wall Wrong?

[OKTexas]

Love ya'all. Good fences make for good neighbors. We have liberal assholes that give illegal aliens freebies . Sanctuary cities. Now, nobody got to vote on whether or not their home town became a sanctuary city, that was so much a liberal cadre " They just presumed they could get away with" thing. Sanctuary cities? Seems that was a overriding Constitutional issue people ignore. Who got to vote to give their city / state ignore federal immigration laws? I didn't, did any of you? Was it on a ballot anywhere? Because, that a pretty significant issue. Ignoring the will of the people and constitutional laws.

I don't have to worry about sanctuary cities in my State, the State outlawed them and require State sanctioned law enforcement agencies (which are all of them) to cooperate with immigration officials.

.

Um, well the rest of us have to worry about unsanctioned legitimizing of illegal aliens. Giving them the vote. The motor voter thing, the whole nine yards. Everything about giving illegal aliens special rights. But they can't follow the same immigration laws everyone else does. Sanctuary cities for Albanians? Or Hungarians? Just Mexicans Because, that's fair. Just Mexicans. Mexicans are so special they transcend the Constitution. And when you notice something broken about that? Hate and xenophobia is what they say.

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have family sponsor.

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

 

[Flopper]

1) I am not arguing inalienable rights.

2) You wrote: " Rights however are granted to people that are in our country."

In one of the earliest United States Supreme Court decisions on this, the court ruled as follows:

"Men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,-'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;' and to 'secure,' not grant or create, these rights, governments are instituted. That property which a man has honestly acquired he retains full control of, subject to these limitations: First, that he shall not use it to his neighbor's injury, and that does not mean that he must use it for his neighbor's benefit; second, that if the devotes it to a public use, he gives to the public a right to control that use; and third, that whenever the public needs require, the public may take it upon payment of due compensation. BUDD v. PEOPLE OF STATE OF NEW YORK, 143 U.S. 517 (1892)

3) I agree that the government "could" strictly enforce the Constitution Free Zone. IF they did, the people would see this is VERY real and they would rebel. So, they do it in small doses. YouTube is full of videos of law abiding Americans who have had their Rights violated in the Constitution Free Zone.

As you will recall, Al Capone was arrested on a 25 year old law that had possibly never been enforced - the people would have rebelled had they known what it was REALLY about (income tax evasion.)

4) I don't do theories. I live in the real world. In order to enforce the laws relative to the wall, your boys have already passed the so - called "Patriot Act," the National ID / REAL ID Act - E Verify and trashed the policies of a presumption of innocence - innocent until proven guilty. You're perfectly comfortable with the Constitution Free Zone and I'd bet there are over 500 suggestions from people you agree with on this thread alone advocating that we "crack down on those sending money out of this country." Those precedents are a dual edged sword.

Frederick Douglass, a former slave and a Republican once said:

"No man can put a chain about the ankle of his fellow man without at last finding the other end fastened around his own neck."

So, you create a bad precedent on the border, falsely thinking it will apply only to undocumented foreigners only to find out it's being used against you. You don't have a very sound strategy. All you've supported in the past expands into a cashless society wherein all your transactions are tracked by the paper trail you left on a computer. You'd support a cashless society if it would get rid of the little brown guys from south of the border. All that will be enacted in order to assist in enforcing the wall... an untended consequence for those who realize that we may be engaged in an internal civil war some day.

The unintended consequences of giving the government as much power as you would - on the pretext that it will save you from yourself is foolish and your repetitive posts and covering the same ground over and over won't make my point any less true.

You know you're defeated; that's why the deflections and your inability to be honest with me. In the end, YOU will be screwed by the very monster you are helping to build... and you will have done it to yourself. We got a lot of ground to cover grasshopper. I'm not going to try and debate everyone at the same time who want some - though the best is invited to a REAL debate on another board where it will be one on one - no holds barred.

So one of the functions of the federal government is not to protect it’s citizens?
And flooding our borders with cheap Labor is enforcing the General Welfare clause?
You have an interesting POV of what defines a nation.
We might as well rename the US the Open Borders.

You are dishonest and probably amoral. Since I have so specified at least a dozen times that it is the function of the government to protect us - it just should not serve as a tool to protect you from your own actions. As for the rest, even danielpalos has a point once each year. He's already answered this lame ass allegation from you and others. You need some new material.

Since I cannot "debate" a dozen people as the delusional call these exchanges, I'm sure you will wait your turn. I'm having a discussion with Ray, so save your lies and when we're on equal footing, I'll take you on.

If you want a one on one argument take it to pm.

Did you ever read Proverbs 18: 13

Already did offer anyone open challenge to take place on another board. Take it to PM to arrange. No takers. People are afraid to go one on one on a level playing field. Got anything else?

Since 5 Billion is a pittance of the budget what is wrong with giving the President a bone? Doesn't he deserve a pet project just like all the other pork earmarks in the bills?

If John McCain, Romey, Jeb Bush, Mark Rubio, Ted Cruz, or any of a half dozen other republican presidential candidates were president and asked for 5 billion dollars for border security last year they would have it now. Why? because they are politicians. They know how to deal with congress and the media. They would be asked for 5 billion to improve border security including improving barriers at selected locations and better facilities for detainees. They certainly would not be asked for money to build a big beautiful wall to keep out Mexican rapist and murders. That's nuts. Such language is guaranteed to create a fight in congress, not approval which should be the goal. This is the main reason I never would consider voting for Trump. His primary goal is winning, what he actually wins is of little importance. It's winning that's important to him, not the actual prize, it's about rubbing the opposition's face in the dirt. For Trump and unfortunately many of his followers that what's important. Look where we are now, a shutdown of government that creating hardships for millions of Americas and it's completely unnecessary. The fact is most of you could have done a better job than Trump because he's a sick narcissist that's totally out of his depth.

 

[Slyhunter]

So one of the functions of the federal government is not to protect it’s citizens?
And flooding our borders with cheap Labor is enforcing the General Welfare clause?
You have an interesting POV of what defines a nation.
We might as well rename the US the Open Borders.

You are dishonest and probably amoral. Since I have so specified at least a dozen times that it is the function of the government to protect us - it just should not serve as a tool to protect you from your own actions. As for the rest, even danielpalos has a point once each year. He's already answered this lame ass allegation from you and others. You need some new material.

Since I cannot "debate" a dozen people as the delusional call these exchanges, I'm sure you will wait your turn. I'm having a discussion with Ray, so save your lies and when we're on equal footing, I'll take you on.

If you want a one on one argument take it to pm.

Did you ever read Proverbs 18: 13

Already did offer anyone open challenge to take place on another board. Take it to PM to arrange. No takers. People are afraid to go one on one on a level playing field. Got anything else?

Since 5 Billion is a pittance of the budget what is wrong with giving the President a bone? Doesn't he deserve a pet project just like all the other pork earmarks in the bills?

If John McCain, Romey, Jeb Bush, Mark Rubio, Ted Cruz, or any of a half dozen other republican presidential candidates were president and asked for 5 billion dollars for border security last year they would have it now. Why? because they are politicians. They know how to deal with congress and the media. They would be asked for 5 billion to improve border security including improving barriers at selected locations and better facilities for detainees. They certainly would not be asked for money to build a big beautiful wall to keep out Mexican rapist and murders. That's nuts. Such language is guaranteed to create a fight in congress, not approval which should be the goal. This is the main reason I never would consider voting for Trump. His primary goal is winning, what he actually wins is of little importance. It's winning that's important to him, not the actual prize, it's about rubbing the opposition's face in the dirt. For Trump and unfortunately many of his followers that what's important. Look where we are now, a shutdown of government that creating hardships for millions of Americas and it's completely unnecessary. The fact is most of you could have done a better job than Trump because he's a sick narcissist that's totally out of his depth.

I voted for him because he's not your typical politician. I voted for him because he's honest and blunt. He can be his own worst enemy. Calling someone a name one moment then wondering why they stab him in the back the next "McCain". He forgets other people have egos that needs to be stoked to get a deal.

 

[Flopper]

Are you drunk? What in the HELL did that mean?

I would never advocate giving up your gun.

But you’re OK denying border agents another form of protection they feel they need?

Who exactly are these border agents; the ones Trump's Customs and Border Protection Director hand picked for Trump's border barrier infomercial at the white house?

Border Patrol agents on the front lines say they need more technology and additional personnel to curb the illegal traffic, according to a report released on Thursday by Democrats on the Senate Homeland Security Committee. Less than one half of 1 percent of the agents’ suggested a border wall.
What Border Agents Say They Want (It’s Not a Wall)

From your New York Times (what else) article:

Officials at Customs and Border Protection called the report inaccurate, saying it confused how agents’ feedback about security vulnerabilities is used to develop programs to counter threats.

This issue in March is in sharp contrast to this article in the Washington Times a month later

Border Patrol agents back Trump wall, survey finds

Notice the term strategic locations. Funny how a border wall changed to a 1000 mile wall, to a wall in strategic locations to a border barrier/border fence which is currently 212 miles long, 112 miles of it replaces a border barrier built in 2006. Unable to get a single dollar to build the great wall Trump promised on the campaign trail, he has now settled on a new strategy: repairing and upgrading the existing fence and calling that his “wall.” Is that what you guys voted for?

So your saying he shouldn't compromise he should build a 2,000 mile wall or he didn't deserve to be elected by we who elected him?

I'm saying he should have told the truth to his supporters, that what was needed was a border barrier in selected locations which is what he is trying to get congress to approve. He never should have accused Mexicans of being rapist and murders. He should never have said he will make Mexico pay for the wall. He just made it that much more difficult getting his border wall approved by congress. Any other republican candidate would have had the 5 billion dollars approved now. Instead we have a standoff between congress and the administration that could last for months hurting millions of Americans.

 

[bripat9643]

What is so funny about my post? I am feeling like Elvis Costello. Peace love & understanding. So, If ya' all want to keep the wankers out, don't hire them! Make them Prove their national identity with state sanctioned national identity card linked to their, DNA, Fingerprints. Things that are verifiable. Might be cheaper and more effective than building a wall on the southern border. But let's keep up cheap petty appearances, like "Border walls". Bully.

What's so funny, you said walls don't word in-spite of all the evidence to the contrary. The fact is they do work, that's why the border patrol is asking for more. If you don't like how it looks, do an about face, problem solved.

.

Love ya'all. Good fences make for good neighbors. We have liberal assholes that give illegal aliens freebies . Sanctuary cities. Now, nobody got to vote on whether or not their home town became a sanctuary city, that was so much a liberal cadre " They just presumed they could get away with" thing. Sanctuary cities? Seems that was a overriding Constitutional issue people ignore. Who got to vote to give their city / state ignore federal immigration laws? I didn't, did any of you? Was it on a ballot anywhere? Because, that a pretty significant issue. Ignoring the will of the people and constitutional laws.

I don't have to worry about sanctuary cities in my State, the State outlawed them and require State sanctioned law enforcement agencies (which are all of them) to cooperate with immigration officials.

.

Um, well the rest of us have to worry about unsanctioned legitimizing of illegal aliens. Giving them the vote. The motor voter thing, the whole nine yards. Everything about giving illegal aliens special rights. But they can't follow the same immigration laws everyone else does. Sanctuary cities for Albanians? Or Hungarians? Just Mexicans Because, that's fair. Just Mexicans. Mexicans are so special they transcend the Constitution. And when you notice something broken about that? Hate and xenophobia is what they say.

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally so they just keep trying.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have a family sponsor.

No, we don't have to give them a chance. Our immigration laws exist for the benefit of American citizens, not for the benefit of foreigners. They can go to the American embassy and apply for a visa like everyone else. this "refugee" status is a scam. None of these people are refugees.

 

[bripat9643]

You are dishonest and probably amoral. Since I have so specified at least a dozen times that it is the function of the government to protect us - it just should not serve as a tool to protect you from your own actions. As for the rest, even danielpalos has a point once each year. He's already answered this lame ass allegation from you and others. You need some new material.

Since I cannot "debate" a dozen people as the delusional call these exchanges, I'm sure you will wait your turn. I'm having a discussion with Ray, so save your lies and when we're on equal footing, I'll take you on.

If you want a one on one argument take it to pm.

Did you ever read Proverbs 18: 13

Already did offer anyone open challenge to take place on another board. Take it to PM to arrange. No takers. People are afraid to go one on one on a level playing field. Got anything else?

Since 5 Billion is a pittance of the budget what is wrong with giving the President a bone? Doesn't he deserve a pet project just like all the other pork earmarks in the bills?

If John McCain, Romey, Jeb Bush, Mark Rubio, Ted Cruz, or any of a half dozen other republican presidential candidates were president and asked for 5 billion dollars for border security last year they would have it now. Why? because they are politicians. They know how to deal with congress and the media. They would be asked for 5 billion to improve border security including improving barriers at selected locations and better facilities for detainees. They certainly would not be asked for money to build a big beautiful wall to keep out Mexican rapist and murders. That's nuts. Such language is guaranteed to create a fight in congress, not approval which should be the goal. This is the main reason I never would consider voting for Trump. His primary goal is winning, what he actually wins is of little importance. It's winning that's important to him, not the actual prize, it's about rubbing the opposition's face in the dirt. For Trump and unfortunately many of his followers that what's important. Look where we are now, a shutdown of government that creating hardships for millions of Americas and it's completely unnecessary. The fact is most of you could have done a better job than Trump because he's a sick narcissist that's totally out of his depth.

I voted for him because he's not your typical politician. I voted for him because he's honest and blunt. He can be his own worst enemy. Calling someone a name one moment then wondering why they stab him in the back the next "McCain". He forgets other people have egos that needs to be stoked to get a deal.

McCain has always been a back stabbing scumbag. He stabbed Trump in the front before Trump ever said anything about him.

 

[Slyhunter]

But you’re OK denying border agents another form of protection they feel they need?

Who exactly are these border agents; the ones Trump's Customs and Border Protection Director hand picked for Trump's border barrier infomercial at the white house?

Border Patrol agents on the front lines say they need more technology and additional personnel to curb the illegal traffic, according to a report released on Thursday by Democrats on the Senate Homeland Security Committee. Less than one half of 1 percent of the agents’ suggested a border wall.
What Border Agents Say They Want (It’s Not a Wall)

From your New York Times (what else) article:

Officials at Customs and Border Protection called the report inaccurate, saying it confused how agents’ feedback about security vulnerabilities is used to develop programs to counter threats.

This issue in March is in sharp contrast to this article in the Washington Times a month later

Border Patrol agents back Trump wall, survey finds

Notice the term strategic locations. Funny how a border wall changed to a 1000 mile wall, to a wall in strategic locations to a border barrier/border fence which is currently 212 miles long, 112 miles of it replaces a border barrier built in 2006. Unable to get a single dollar to build the great wall Trump promised on the campaign trail, he has now settled on a new strategy: repairing and upgrading the existing fence and calling that his “wall.” Is that what you guys voted for?

So your saying he shouldn't compromise he should build a 2,000 mile wall or he didn't deserve to be elected by we who elected him?

I'm saying he should have told the truth to his supporters, that what was needed was a border barrier in selected locations which is what he is trying to get congress to approve. He never should have accused Mexicans of being rapist and murders. He should never have said he will make Mexico pay for the wall. He just made it that much more difficult getting his border wall approved by congress. Any other republican candidate would have had the 5 billion dollars approved now. Instead we have a standoff between congress and the administration that could last for months hurting millions of Americans.

He told the truth, as he knew it at the time. He tends to talk out his ass so don't expect his version of truth to be letter perfect to the actual truth.
He didn't call Mexicans rapist and murders, he called the Mexicans who snuck across the border rapist and murders and as far as we know they were.
He meant for Mexico to pay for the wall but didn't truly understand the limits of his power or how he would do it once he was President.
Any other candidate wouldn't of built the wall at all.

 

[bripat9643]

I don't have to worry about sanctuary cities in my State, the State outlawed them and require State sanctioned law enforcement agencies (which are all of them) to cooperate with immigration officials.

.

Um, well the rest of us have to worry about unsanctioned legitimizing of illegal aliens. Giving them the vote. The motor voter thing, the whole nine yards. Everything about giving illegal aliens special rights. But they can't follow the same immigration laws everyone else does. Sanctuary cities for Albanians? Or Hungarians? Just Mexicans Because, that's fair. Just Mexicans. Mexicans are so special they transcend the Constitution. And when you notice something broken about that? Hate and xenophobia is what they say.

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have family sponsor.

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

I don;'t think it works that way. We have a limit of 1 million immigrants a year. They divide that up. Doesn't sound to me they worry about immigrants in year 10 much less in year 2 they just worry about the limit for the current year. Now there may be so many Hondurans in line it'll take 10 years to reach a new immigrant applicant if they added themselves to the list today, but that is due to how many more are applying every year then being allowed in.

I would limit immigration to those with money or those directly related to someone in America. We don't need unskilled laborers anymore so they should be left outside of the cue, unable to ever immigrate to America.

"Related" means immediate family: wives and children, not brothers aunts, uncles or parents or cousins.

 

[bripat9643]

So one of the functions of the federal government is not to protect it’s citizens?
And flooding our borders with cheap Labor is enforcing the General Welfare clause?
You have an interesting POV of what defines a nation.
We might as well rename the US the Open Borders.

You are dishonest and probably amoral. Since I have so specified at least a dozen times that it is the function of the government to protect us - it just should not serve as a tool to protect you from your own actions. As for the rest, even danielpalos has a point once each year. He's already answered this lame ass allegation from you and others. You need some new material.

Since I cannot "debate" a dozen people as the delusional call these exchanges, I'm sure you will wait your turn. I'm having a discussion with Ray, so save your lies and when we're on equal footing, I'll take you on.

If you want a one on one argument take it to pm.

Did you ever read Proverbs 18: 13

Already did offer anyone open challenge to take place on another board. Take it to PM to arrange. No takers. People are afraid to go one on one on a level playing field. Got anything else?

Since 5 Billion is a pittance of the budget what is wrong with giving the President a bone? Doesn't he deserve a pet project just like all the other pork earmarks in the bills?

If John McCain, Romey, Jeb Bush, Mark Rubio, Ted Cruz, or any of a half dozen other republican presidential candidates were president and asked for 5 billion dollars for border security last year they would have it now. Why? because they are politicians. They know how to deal with congress and the media. They would be asked for 5 billion to improve border security including improving barriers at selected locations and better facilities for detainees. They certainly would not be asked for money to build a big beautiful wall to keep out Mexican rapist and murders. That's nuts. Such language is guaranteed to create a fight in congress, not approval which should be the goal. This is the main reason I never would consider voting for Trump. His primary goal is winning, what he actually wins is of little importance. It's winning that's important to him, not the actual prize, it's about rubbing the opposition's face in the dirt. For Trump and unfortunately many of his followers that what's important. Look where we are now, a shutdown of government that creating hardships for millions of Americas and it's completely unnecessary. The fact is most of you could have done a better job than Trump because he's a sick narcissist that's totally out of his depth.

Bullshit. The Dims don't want border security. They want more Democrats to come flooding into the country.

 

[Flopper]

I don't have to worry about sanctuary cities in my State, the State outlawed them and require State sanctioned law enforcement agencies (which are all of them) to cooperate with immigration officials.

.

Um, well the rest of us have to worry about unsanctioned legitimizing of illegal aliens. Giving them the vote. The motor voter thing, the whole nine yards. Everything about giving illegal aliens special rights. But they can't follow the same immigration laws everyone else does. Sanctuary cities for Albanians? Or Hungarians? Just Mexicans Because, that's fair. Just Mexicans. Mexicans are so special they transcend the Constitution. And when you notice something broken about that? Hate and xenophobia is what they say.

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have family sponsor.

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

No, but I've been to Guatemala. It's not about letting the in the people we need. It's about changing the environment that sends tens of thousand of people to our border. Instead of sending our military to the our border to sit on their ass and build housing for detainees, we need to clean out the Northern Triangle and stop sending money to these dictators that funnel it to cartels and gangs. We need to increase the immigration limits on Central American countries by only few thousand so there is reasonable wait time. That in itself will reduce the number heading toward our border. By making life better in these countries we will not only reduce illegal immigration but also reduce drugs headed toward the US.

 

[Slyhunter]

Um, well the rest of us have to worry about unsanctioned legitimizing of illegal aliens. Giving them the vote. The motor voter thing, the whole nine yards. Everything about giving illegal aliens special rights. But they can't follow the same immigration laws everyone else does. Sanctuary cities for Albanians? Or Hungarians? Just Mexicans Because, that's fair. Just Mexicans. Mexicans are so special they transcend the Constitution. And when you notice something broken about that? Hate and xenophobia is what they say.

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have family sponsor.

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

No, but I've been to Guatemala. It's not about letting the in the people we need. It's about changing the environment that sends tens of thousand of people to our border. Instead of sending our military to the our border to sit on their ass and build housing for detainees, we need to clean out the Northern Triangle and stop sending money to these dictators that funnel it to cartels and gangs. We need to increase the immigration limits on Central American countries by only few thousand so there is reasonable wait time. That in itself will reduce the number heading toward our border. By making life better in these countries we will not only reduce illegal immigration but also reduce drugs headed toward the US.

It isn't our job to fix their problems. Immigration should be shut off totally from poverty stricken countries until they fix their own problems. It's unreasonable to expect us to accommodate their needs without regards to our needs.

 

[Flopper]

Um, well the rest of us have to worry about unsanctioned legitimizing of illegal aliens. Giving them the vote. The motor voter thing, the whole nine yards. Everything about giving illegal aliens special rights. But they can't follow the same immigration laws everyone else does. Sanctuary cities for Albanians? Or Hungarians? Just Mexicans Because, that's fair. Just Mexicans. Mexicans are so special they transcend the Constitution. And when you notice something broken about that? Hate and xenophobia is what they say.

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have family sponsor.

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

No, but I've been to Guatemala. It's not about letting the in the people we need. It's about changing the environment that sends tens of thousand of people to our border. Instead of sending our military to the our border to sit on their ass and build housing for detainees, we need to clean out the Northern Triangle and stop sending money to these dictators that funnel it to cartels and gangs. We need to increase the immigration limits on Central American countries by only few thousand so there is reasonable wait time. That in itself will reduce the number heading toward our border. By making life better in these countries we will not only reduce illegal immigration but also reduce drugs headed toward the US.

 

[bripat9643]

Um, well the rest of us have to worry about unsanctioned legitimizing of illegal aliens. Giving them the vote. The motor voter thing, the whole nine yards. Everything about giving illegal aliens special rights. But they can't follow the same immigration laws everyone else does. Sanctuary cities for Albanians? Or Hungarians? Just Mexicans Because, that's fair. Just Mexicans. Mexicans are so special they transcend the Constitution. And when you notice something broken about that? Hate and xenophobia is what they say.

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have family sponsor.

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

No, but I've been to Guatemala. It's not about letting the in the people we need. It's about changing the environment that sends tens of thousand of people to our border. Instead of sending our military to the our border to sit on their ass and build housing for detainees, we need to clean out the Northern Triangle and stop sending money to these dictators that funnel it to cartels and gangs. We need to increase the immigration limits on Central American countries by only few thousand so there is reasonable wait time. That in itself will reduce the number heading toward our border. By making life better in these countries we will not only reduce illegal immigration but also reduce drugs headed toward the US.

Wrong. The one thing we don't need is to allow more people from Central American shit holes into this country.

Quit blaming America for these corrupt governments.

 

[bripat9643]

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have family sponsor.

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

No, but I've been to Guatemala. It's not about letting the in the people we need. It's about changing the environment that sends tens of thousand of people to our border. Instead of sending our military to the our border to sit on their ass and build housing for detainees, we need to clean out the Northern Triangle and stop sending money to these dictators that funnel it to cartels and gangs. We need to increase the immigration limits on Central American countries by only few thousand so there is reasonable wait time. That in itself will reduce the number heading toward our border. By making life better in these countries we will not only reduce illegal immigration but also reduce drugs headed toward the US.

It isn't our job to fix their problems. Immigration should be shut off totally from poverty stricken countries until they fix their own problems. It's unreasonable to expect us to accommodate their needs without regards to our needs.

Flopper believes we are the welfare agency for the entire world.

 

[toobfreak]

You are lying. It's ONE of your laundry list reasons for being for the wall

EXCUSE ME for interjecting here, I see you are STILL arguing about the wall! I honestly don't see what the debate is about:

Indigent Illegals crossing the southern borders in mass quantities? THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

This has a negative impact on our resources and wage earning potential for many americans competing in similar job markets that Mexicans do here? THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

Putting up a complete, better wall would hugely impact their coming here? THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

This country safer from potential terrorist intrusion with the wall? THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.

Being for the wall? Are you kidding me? This is never about a wall, it is about national security and sovereignty. If anyone says it is about protectionism, so what if it is? LET ONE PERSON HERE tell me protectionism is bad and they are against it and I will ask them if they have a lock on their front door, if they lock their car, have a security light or security system? LET ONE PERSON HERE tell me they don't PROTECT what they have, and I'll call you a LIAR.

Being for the wall? The issue here is BEING FOR NATIONAL SECURITY. The wall makes us more secure with it than without it. Anyone here arguing against national security is either a commie, an anti-American or has fruit loops for brains.

Better ways to do it? BULL.

Cheaper ways to do it? BULL?

Immoral? Go fuck yourself.

Anyone who claims a wall is "immoral" against these mobs of dirty, stinking, diseased illegals but its not "immoral" for what blindly letting these people into the country is doing to us here, is a fucking idiot. Maybe you don't see it where you live, but we are approaching 12 million of these people. That's about 4% of the population. Cut them off today and in another decade with their kids (all supported by low income government programs that come out of YOUR pocket, they'll be at 10%.

Like all things, you get what you fund. We are funding a low income, low education, low skill, high dependence work force. The exact OPPOSITE of what this country made itself great with.

Enough. End it now. Its the LAW. Defend the borders. I'm tired of hearing people argue against the most basic, fundamental responsibility of the federal government. Trump: tear the shit down until these motherfuckers in Congress say uncle! It's go for broke right now and I say put the bastard democrats in prison if they continue to block what we put you in office to do. If you don't like Trump and didn't put him in office, fine. When you get YOUR guy in office, then it'll be your time to get YOUR agenda carried out.

But I really think democrats oppose the wall so much because THEY KNOW IT WILL WORK. And they don't WANT it to work. Democratic scum care less about Americans than they do every dirty wetback minority they can dig out from under a rock.

 

[Flopper]

If you expect them to follow the same immigration laws and regulations and wait their turn then you have to give them a chance to do so. In Central American countries and also in Mexico to a lesser extent, these people have no chance to legally immigrate.

These countries have immigration limits establish by congress. That limit is reduced by family sponsored immigration, employer sponsored immigration, critical skills immigration, change in immigration status of those holding visas, refugee admissions, reserved categories such as the clergy and other special circumstances. After reducing the immigration limit for all these categories, there is essential no way to legally immigrate even if you wait for years.

There's a rule that bans a person from legally legally immigrating for 5 or 10 years if caught entering the country illegally or overstaying visas. However, in these countries that ban means nothing to people deported because there's no way they would ever get into the country legally.

Immigration laws make no sense. Why does it take over 10 years to immigrate from Honduras and 1 year from Ethiopia and never from India if don't have family sponsor.

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

No, but I've been to Guatemala. It's not about letting the in the people we need. It's about changing the environment that sends tens of thousand of people to our border. Instead of sending our military to the our border to sit on their ass and build housing for detainees, we need to clean out the Northern Triangle and stop sending money to these dictators that funnel it to cartels and gangs. We need to increase the immigration limits on Central American countries by only few thousand so there is reasonable wait time. That in itself will reduce the number heading toward our border. By making life better in these countries we will not only reduce illegal immigration but also reduce drugs headed toward the US.

It isn't our job to fix their problems. Immigration should be shut off totally from poverty stricken countries until they fix their own problems. It's unreasonable to expect us to accommodate their needs without regards to our needs.

Well it may not be our job but when it fixes our problem as well as there's it just might be worth considering. Financially, building barriers is a losing game. We build them, hire thousands of board guards and 10 years latter we tear them down and build new barrier a few feet higher and hire more guards. When the barrier get too high, the migrants move to easier entry points. We are spending 40 billion now on boarder security. Homeland security wants 200 billion. At the rate we are spending money on border security, we might just want to consider paying these people to stay home.

 

[Slyhunter]

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

No, but I've been to Guatemala. It's not about letting the in the people we need. It's about changing the environment that sends tens of thousand of people to our border. Instead of sending our military to the our border to sit on their ass and build housing for detainees, we need to clean out the Northern Triangle and stop sending money to these dictators that funnel it to cartels and gangs. We need to increase the immigration limits on Central American countries by only few thousand so there is reasonable wait time. That in itself will reduce the number heading toward our border. By making life better in these countries we will not only reduce illegal immigration but also reduce drugs headed toward the US.

It isn't our job to fix their problems. Immigration should be shut off totally from poverty stricken countries until they fix their own problems. It's unreasonable to expect us to accommodate their needs without regards to our needs.

Well it may not be our job but when it fixes our problem as well as there's it just might be worth considering. Financially building barriers is a losing game. We build them, hire thousands of board guards and 10 years we tear them down and build new barrier a few feet higher and hire more guards. When the barrier get too high, the migrants move easier entry point. We are spending 40 billion now on boarder security. Homeland security wants 200 billion. At the rate we are spending money on border security, we might just want to consider paying these people to stay home.

You pay them they'll multiply.

 

[bripat9643]

Because we can't hold them all. You seem to think anyone who wants to should be able to move to America. That would be the end of America.

Absolutely not. We just need to have policies that are fairer and make sense. Do we really think Ethiopians make such good citizens that they should be admitted in a year and Hondurans should have to wait 10 year or more.

Why would we want either unless they have skills this country needs? Have you ever been to rural areas of Honduras?

.

No, but I've been to Guatemala. It's not about letting the in the people we need. It's about changing the environment that sends tens of thousand of people to our border. Instead of sending our military to the our border to sit on their ass and build housing for detainees, we need to clean out the Northern Triangle and stop sending money to these dictators that funnel it to cartels and gangs. We need to increase the immigration limits on Central American countries by only few thousand so there is reasonable wait time. That in itself will reduce the number heading toward our border. By making life better in these countries we will not only reduce illegal immigration but also reduce drugs headed toward the US.

It isn't our job to fix their problems. Immigration should be shut off totally from poverty stricken countries until they fix their own problems. It's unreasonable to expect us to accommodate their needs without regards to our needs.

Well it may not be our job but when it fixes our problem as well as there's it just might be worth considering. Financially, building barriers is a losing game. We build them, hire thousands of board guards and 10 years latter we tear them down and build new barrier a few feet higher and hire more guards. When the barrier get too high, the migrants move to easier entry points. We are spending 40 billion now on boarder security. Homeland security wants 200 billion. At the rate we are spending money on border security, we might just want to consider paying these people to stay home.

You are so full of shit. No, we don't "build them, hire thousands of board guards and 10 years latter we tear them down and build new barrier a few feet higher and hire more guards." If we build a solid 30 foot wall, we will do it once.

Homeland security includes things like the Coast Gaurd, the TSA, FEMA and more. Its entire budget is $40 billion.

 

[danielpalos]

I actually have been to the INS. I am appalled that we had so many illegal aliens from ...then I was cut at the knees. In 1993. Apparently it's OK Mexican illegals sneak in and then... Fill in the blank. I have known all these other immigrants from like ...fill in the blank. Immigrants that worked hard to get visas and fulfilled their contracts as immigrants. To be honest, I can't remember most of them. Rumanians? Hungarians? They worked bloody hard to get in here. . They acclimated and respected America. And giving them sanctuary cities? That never happened back in the day.

But, Mexicans? Or Hondurans? How did giving sanctuary cities to people ignoring federal immigration law from Latin America just suddenly happen extra judicially? Anybody get to vote on that sanctuary city stuff? I seem to think that giving people that violate immigration laws immunity from laws is unconstitutional somehow...But that's just me. ​

our drug war is destabilizing Latin America and is unconstitutional. only the right wing never gets it.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

If police officers ask for guns should we not give them guns because in someone’s opinion it infringes on their liberties? I find that odd.

Are you drunk? What in the HELL did that mean?

I would never advocate giving up your gun.

But you’re OK denying border agents another form of protection they feel they need?

Who exactly are these border agents; the ones Trump's Customs and Border Protection Director hand picked for Trump's border barrier infomercial at the white house?

Border Patrol agents on the front lines say they need more technology and additional personnel to curb the illegal traffic, according to a report released on Thursday by Democrats on the Senate Homeland Security Committee. Less than one half of 1 percent of the agents’ suggested a border wall.
What Border Agents Say They Want (It’s Not a Wall)

From your New York Times (what else) article:

Officials at Customs and Border Protection called the report inaccurate, saying it confused how agents’ feedback about security vulnerabilities is used to develop programs to counter threats.

This issue in March is in sharp contrast to this article in the Washington Times a month later

Border Patrol agents back Trump wall, survey finds

Notice the term strategic locations. Funny how a border wall changed to a 1000 mile wall, to a wall in strategic locations to a border barrier/border fence which is currently 212 miles long, 112 miles of it replaces a border barrier built in 2006. Unable to get a single dollar to build the great wall Trump promised on the campaign trail, he has now settled on a new strategy: repairing and upgrading the existing fence and calling that his “wall.” Is that what you guys voted for?

To me “wall” was short for stronger border security. I didn’t take it literally but after hearing the border patrol agents I think the monies are reasonable and they are on the frontlines. As I asked you before and you conveniently ignored, do you live in a house with walls and doors? Why should our country not have the same protection?