Are Folks Making America Hate Again?

[Bradskii]

Do you have any evidence the women and minorities in the study were at all influenced by Christian beliefs?

Your posts are an excellent example.

 

[Postvieww]

That's because we were talking specifically about innocent people who commit no other crime besides crossing the border undocumented.

Those are not the target of ICE at this time.

 

[BCP1928]

Those are not the target of ICE at this time.

That wasn't the question. The assertion was made that such people were, just by stepping over the line committing a very serious crime.

 

[Postvieww]

That wasn't the question. The assertion was made that such people were, just by stepping over the line committing a very serious crime.

Why is there even a discussion on whether or not someone who came here ILLEGALLY should be sent back to where they came from?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Why is there even a discussion on whether or not someone who came here ILLEGALLY should be sent back to where they came from?

Because the process is broken and does not adequately address the emergent needs of people legitimately seeking asylum.

 

[BCP1928]

Why is there even a discussion on whether or not someone who came here ILLEGALLY should be sent back to where they came from?

Because some people who come here illegally can take advantage of various opportunities to regularize their status. All perfectly legal. (up until now, of course). Once they qualify, their presence in the country is constructively legal and they cannot be deported without a a hearing (at least up to now). That's what the fuss is about.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Why is there even a discussion on whether or not someone who came here ILLEGALLY should be sent back to where they came from?

And why is there even a discussion on whether or not someone who exceeded the speed limit ILLEGALLY should keep his driver's license?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Undocumented Immigrant Offending Rate Lower Than U.S.-Born Citizen Rate

https://docs.house.gov/meetings/JU/JU01/20250122/117827/HHRG-119-JU01-20250122-SD004.pdf

 

[doubtingmerle]

What do you not understand about undocumented = ILLEGAL worker?

Yes, we all understand that undocumented people are here illegally.

That is the very subject we were discussing here when you dropped in.

But is there still reason to show mercy? Perhaps you should read what we are saying before you comment, yes?

Yes, but in NY, they were given 5-star hotel rooms and debit cards.

Wrong. No immigrants were housed in 5-star hotels.

And also, those debit cards were for asylum seekers who were waiting for their cases to be heard.

They are going to need food while they are waiting.

When all those people arrived unexpectedly, the debit card program was an experimental program to resolve this.

A Fox News station said, "According to the city, the cards cost about half as much as what it costs to deliver boxes of food to the families staying at hotels, saving the city so far over $598,000" (source).

Not bad, huh? It was an emergency plan that was adopted quickly because the immigrants' arrival had not been planned.
We had to do something.

And surely, it would have been wrong to let them starve, yes?

Do you have a source from Biden's tenure? You are not being honest, trying to make your argument valid.

Uh, the studies I posted about the effects of undocumented workers on wages were recent.

Do the effects of immigrants really change that much in a decade?

Whatever — here is an update from 2024 that reaches the same conclusion.

Are you happy now?

 

[Laodicean60]

Wrong. No immigrants were housed in 5-star hotels.

your right, no 5 star, but 1 4 star and the rest 3 star.

Not bad, huh?

I would say it was bad and the reason sanctuary cities was begging for money.

And also, those debit cards were for asylum seekers who were waiting for their cases to be heard.

Just in the year 2024

(The Center Square) — New York City officials are dramatically expanding a controversial program that gives debit cards pre-loaded with cash to migrant families staying in taxpayer-funded hotels across the city.

The Adams administration says another round of debit cards is expected to be distributed to more than 7,300 migrants over the next six months, costing the city about $2.6 million. The move represents a major expansion of a pilot program that began earlier this year that doled out cards to about 3,000 migrants.

Over the past year, the city has spent more than $1 billion on tens of thousands of migrants under its care and expects to spend about $10 billion on migrant costs in coming years.

And also, those debit cards were for asylum seekers who were waiting for their cases to be heard.

"Through the immediate response cards pilot program, we were able to reduce food waste, redirect millions of dollars to our local economy, and provide more culturally relevant food to more than 2,600 migrant families in our care. As we move towards more competitive contracting for asylum seeker programs, we have chosen not to renew the emergency contract for this pilot program once the one-year term concludes. For over two years, we have provided care to more than 222,000 migrants while saving $2 billion in asylum seeker-related costs. Thanks to our resettlement efforts, intensive case management, and national-leading Asylum Application Help Center, more than 160,000 migrants have left our shelter system and taken their next steps towards self-sufficiency. We will continue to implement and learn from innovative pilot programs like the immediate response cards program as we care for hundreds of new arrivals every week."

NYC ending controversial debit card program for migrants

New York City will end its controversial debit card program for migrants.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[doubtingmerle]

(The Center Square) — New York City officials are dramatically expanding a controversial program that gives debit cards pre-loaded with cash to migrant families staying in taxpayer-funded hotels across the city.

The Adams administration says another round of debit cards is expected to be distributed to more than 7,300 migrants over the next six months, costing the city about $2.6 million.

If there is a more efficient way to do it, then yes, let's be more efficient.

Now, back to my question: "And surely, it would have been wrong to let them starve, yes?" Do you have an answer?

 

[Laodicean60]

Are you happy now?

The reason Hispanics voted for Trump. Are you happy now?

Federal funding in 2023 on just 3 cities. Notice the FEMA money and the debacle with that in NC. State money is not included.

New York City
Total Federal Funding Received: Approximately $104.6 million through FEMA's SSP.

Chicago​

• Federal Grants: Received $33 million in federal grants, with $19.8 million allocated for food and $13.2 million for shelter services.

Denver​

• Federal Funding: Allocated $8.6 million through DHS's SSP, plus an additional $909,000 from FEMA's EFSP.

 

[Postvieww]

All of the talk by many on the left of compassion for the illegals let in this country by the Biden administration is just a smoke screen. The fact is many liberals want the influx of illegal immigrants to pad census numbers for restricting purposes, numbers of congressional seats, to affect the electoral college, and yes a few illegal voters. This is not rocket science! Liberal politicians are lying to the American people.

 

[Lukaris]

How many waves of unlawful migrations can be handled? Legal immigration in the USA is set around 675,000 annually. My guess is that this is set on a balance of humanitarian and sustainable concerns. This ends up being doubled, tripled and to have concerns about it is considered “hateful” by various anointed.

The case of Haiti is an example of possible perpetual waves of migrations because it is probably becoming unlivable there. It is sad and unfortunate, but bitter truth that there seems to be no solution for their misery.

There seems to be no political solution for Haiti as the US tried to create a police force there but it collapsed. Other perpetual problems plague society there and relief efforts seem to usually fail.

Corruption in Haiti - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Environmentally, Haiti also seems like it is on the brink. On the Dominican side of Hispaniola, there are trees while the Haitian side is mostly deforested.

NASA Scientific Visualization Studio | Haitian Deforestation

The border between Haiti and the Dominican Republic (D.R.) is more than just a political boundary. It also reflects the large amount of deforestation that has occurred on the Haitian side of the border. One can easily see from satellite imagery the lush forests still thriving on the D.R. side...

svs.gsfc.nasa.gov

My guess is that the Dominican Republic sees some sort of writing on the wall in this situation and is erecting a huge border wall.

Dominican Republic–Haiti border - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

The US can take in Haitians surely but how many? Then there are dozens of other nations to consider, where does it end?

 

[Laodicean60]

Now, back to my question: "And surely, it would have been wrong to let them starve, yes?" Do you have an answer?

It was wrong to allow them to be human trafficked in the first place. It is also wrong to allow more in than cities can be cared for because of no planning.

Yes it's wrong to have open borders and have them starve. Americans didn't get free debit cards while facing food insecurity.

If this article is for Americans with food insecurities so I can imagine how many illegals struggled for food.

"Sept 4 (Reuters) - Hunger reached its highest point in the United States in nearly a decade last year, with 18 million households, or 13.5%, struggling at some point to secure enough food, a Department of Agriculture report released on Wednesday said."

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/hunger-us-continued-multi-year-rise-2023-says-farm-agency-report-2024-09-04/

 

[doubtingmerle]

Absolutely! Trump is far more concerned with the constitution than the rogue liberal Judges who ignore it completely

Excuse me, but I linked to a video where Trump was asked directly, "Don't you need to uphold the constitution of the United States," and he said, "I don't know."

This does not concern you?

Please give me an example of any liberal judge who demonstrated a more blatant disregard for the constitution.

Your use of the word "legitimate" here is laughable and false.

I gave you a link which had links to dozens of legitimate programs that Congress approved that are now in jeopardy.

Why is that laughable?

Are you saying that Congress doesn't have the legitimate authority to authorize spending?

It might be helpful if you actually looked at some of the absurd wasteful spending found by DOGE and not pay attention to the false reporting and scare tactics of the left.

Yes, that would be helpful.

Please give me some examples of absurd wasteful spending that DOGE found.

The stock market has always had ups and downs! I am actually buying right now and you should too.

I have explained multiple times why the fall of the stock market is a concern.

See Trump Voters, Are You Happy Now?

Nations that have taken advantage of us through our stupidity and generosity are now wanting to make a deal!

Trump keeps talking about nations taking advantage of us, and the example he keeps giving is that we have a negative trade balance with them.

All that means is that they sell us more than we sell to them.

How is that "taking advantage of us"?

I have a negative trade balance with Amazon. They sell me more than I sell to them.

Does that mean Amazon is taking advantage of me?

And also, what nations are lining up to make a deal?

It looks more like The Art of No Deal.

Again your use of the word "legitimate" here is laughable! No legit services have been cut.

What about all the gutting of food banks by Trump? (source, source, source, source, and source).

And can you with a straight poker face accuse the right of this when liberal cities, Judges have done exactly what you say here.

Yes, of course I can accuse the right of setting violent criminals free.

I gave you a link to prove it.

So, when I can prove it, I can say it with a straight poker face.

Your response to the assertion that Trump set violent criminals free is that liberals do this too?

Even if that is true, that does not make my statement false: Trump set violent criminals free.

You should really watch accurate news reporting on this.

Can you suggest a few news sources I should watch, and how you know they are accurate?

I suggest sources like ABC News, CBS News, PBS, Bloomberg, and The Economist.

If you want to know why, see this explanation.

Maybe you should actually study what due process is actually due to illegal aliens, TERRORISTS, gang members sent by a foreign nation to destabilize our nation. THEY DO NOT HAVE THE SAME CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTIONS AS CITIZENS OF THIS NATION!

Maybe you should read the Constitution.

nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law (source).​

Terrorists are persons, yes?

This applies to all persons.

 

[stevil]

and to have concerns about it is considered “hateful” by various anointed.

I think it is completely fine to have concerns about immigration and illegal immigrants.
Most countries, including USA have border control, and have an immigration department and have immigration policies and criteria for people seeking immigration or asylum.

Both major parties in the USA have deported illegal immigrants and turned people away at the border. This is totally fine.

But then it gets problematic when some prominent people (including the current president) say racist things.
"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."

Talking about Haitians he said
“They’re eating the dogs. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating the pets of the people that live there,”

Trump talking about the Squad
“Why don’t they go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”
The trope, "go back to where you came from" is a racist trope. Only racists would use this phrase.

Trump when talking about immigrants
"poisoning the blood of our country.

This is straight up, NAZI level xenophobic racism.

"And they are emptying out their prisons, and they're emptying out their mental institutions and insane asylums into the U.S., and we're not a dumping ground."
Talk about a very hateful way to mis-characterise immigrants. Trump is fuelling hatred and racism in USA, and wanting to get at least half of USA to be upset about immigrants. Thinking they are horrible people, criminal, dangerous, crazy, and even eating people's pets.

Then you have Fox news hosts talking about the Great Replacement theory,
Many of the false narratives Carlson promoted were part of the "great replacement" conspiracy theory, the racist fiction that non white people are being brought into the U.S. to replace white voters.

I think there is very good reason to consider RACISM as being a core underlying drive for the Trump administrations approach to dealing with immigrants.

 

[MrMoe]

They take these risks because the dangers they face at home are even worse.

Then making where they come from safer should be prioritised.

The majority of illegal immigrants are from Mexico, and Mexico is heading to a potential aging population crisis in about 2050.

Why not fix the problems in the country where they are from so they wouldn’t have to risk their lives coming to America.

So, are you saying that, because deportation strains the system, we should therefore have more deportation?

That argument doesn't even make sense.

We could have stopped the strain by not letting them in, in the first place like Biden did.

OK, you seem to be agreeing with me that some people are here illegally who could rightfully have been considered for asylum status.

If they gain that status, then they are here legally — which is my point.

For some people who are currently here illegally, there is no safe place for them to return, and thus, they should have the right to appeal for asylum.

Perhaps they didn't go through the correct procedures, and perhaps they are currently working here illegally when they should have first gone through the asylum process. Yes. But they still deserve to have their case heard — and to be dealt with not only according to the letter of the law, but also with compassion and mercy.

Tom Homan is taking care of it. If they can’t return to they’re country they can be deported to another that will accept them.

Stevil basically just implied the president is a Nazi sympathiser, so the biggest mercy I would think is to get these people out of this supposedly systemically racist country lead by a Nazi sympathiser.

 

[MrMoe]

Your posts are an excellent example.

The article is from 2017. Didn’t know my posts were so powerful they can go back in time and affect people I’ve never met.

 

[doubtingmerle]

Then making where they come from safer should be prioritised.

The majority of illegal immigrants are from Mexico, and Mexico is heading to a potential aging population crisis in about 2050.

Why not fix the problems in the country where they are from so they wouldn’t have to risk their lives coming to America.

That's a new twist. It used to be, "We are going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it."

Now is it, "We are going to rebuild Mexico and make America pay for it"?

Or wasn't that your intention? Was your intention that we just tell countries in the South — perhaps by a presidential edict — to get your act together? That's it?

Why didn't I think of that?

We could have stopped the strain by not letting them in, in the first place like Biden did.

OK, we hop into our DeLorean and go back a year.

Here we are in 2024.

Now, if only we can persuade Congress to propose a bill with bipartisan support to strengthen border security.

Wait, what?

Following months of negotiations, on February 4, 2024, a bipartisan group of senators released a 370-page bill intended to sharply reduce incentives for migrants to attempt border crossings. The bill included a "border emergency" provision that would automatically require the border to be closed if border encounters reached an average of 5,000 per day over several days. (source)​

Great. Now what?

Senate Republicans swiftly turned against the bill upon its release, after Trump openly said he did not want Joe Biden to score a political win with the legislation. [96]​

On February 7, Senate Republicans blocked the proposal in a floor vote.​

Lankford said on the floor before the vote that a "popular commentator" had told him a month earlier, "'If you try to move a bill that solves the border crisis during this presidential year, I will do whatever I can to destroy you, because I do not want you to solve this during the presidential election.'"​

Two days before the vote, Trump told a radio host, "This is a very bad bill for his career." [97]​

Trump said at a rally days later, "We crushed crooked Joe Biden's disastrous open borders bill," while Biden said, "Every day between now and November, the American people are going to know that the only reason the border is not secure is Donald Trump and his MAGA Republican friends." (source)​

And who shall we blame for the fact that this bill did not pass?

Moving on — we don't have a DeLorean. So, it is what it is.

What is the solution?

As I have said before, it is a complex issue that needs to be guided by justice and mercy.

Some people need to be deported. For many, the best path forward is to let them stay with a path toward legal status. The border needs to be secure, with crossings minimized. There needs to be a clear humanitarian asylum program. And it gets quite complex.

Now, if only we had a Congress that did its job — and a competent President.

Tom Homan is taking care of it.

Lord, have mercy. Really?

If they can’t return to they’re country they can be deported to another that will accept them.

Ah, so the solution is to tell migrants that they should find a safe country they can integrate into and build a new life there.

Check. They did that.

They came here.