Do you agree with the President on border enforcement and illegal aliens?

Always in His Presence · Saturday at 1:27 PM

The American people are a welcoming and generous people. But those who enter our country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law. And because we live in an age where terrorists are challenging our borders, we simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Americans are right to demand better border security and better enforcement of the immigration laws

User Clip: Obama on Immigration 2006

The American people are a welcoming and generous people. But those who enter our country illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of law. And because we live in an age where terrorists are challenging our borders, we simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States...

www.c-span.org

“All Americans…are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public services they use impose burdens on our taxpayers.”

GoldenBoy89 · Saturday at 1:30 PM

Why did Trump run on a platform that Obama wasn’t doing anything about illegal immigration but suddenly now, Obama’s non-existent at the time immigration policies are being held up as the gold standard by the right? Make it make sense.

Always in His Presence · Saturday at 2:42 PM

GoldenBoy89 said:
Why did Trump run on a platform that Obama wasn’t doing anything about illegal immigration but suddenly now, Obama’s non-existent at the time immigration policies are being held up as the gold standard by the right? Make it make sense.

This thread isn't about Trump -

I know he is a fixation in some minds -

GoldenBoy89 · Saturday at 2:45 PM

Always in His Presence said:
This thread isn't about Trump -

I know he is a fixation in some minds -

He seems much more relevant to today’s political climate than a guy who hasn’t been president for over 12 years now and especially so when compared to a guy who hasn’t been president in 25 years.

But I know… anything to distract from the current mess we’re in.

Yttrium · Saturday at 3:02 PM

Always in His Presence said:
This thread isn't about Trump -

Huh? You asked us if we agree with Trump, then you say that the thread isn't about Trump? What?

Personally, I don't mind illegal immigration all that much. The US has been depending on the cheap labor for a long time now. However, now that the US has put Trump back in office, I fully expect Trump to crack down hard on illegal immigration. That's one of the key reasons he was elected. And he's finding new and intriguing ways to turn legal visitors and immigrants into illegal ones and deport them.

So, Trump is deporting and detaining huge numbers of people, reducing the cheap labor pool, separating families, trying to kick out babies born in the US who should be considered citizens, and sending the troops in to overcome resistance. Things are working out well. Trump needs to bring us pain to punish us for being foolish enough to elect him again.

Fervent · Saturday at 3:15 PM

While I agree our current immigration situation is unsustainable, I don't think the solution rests in rounding up day laborers in Home Depot parking lots. Nor do I think deportation for migrants who have been in the country for years and have an established life is ethically justifiable, even if they originaally entered illegally. What we need is enforcement of employer penalties and if that enforcement is not enough to lead to those employers paying high enough wages that citizens will take the jobs, increase the penalties until they do. As for those in the country already, if they haven't violated the law in some other way provide them with a pathway to citizenship and allow them to attain legal status in the meantime.

Always in His Presence · Saturday at 5:25 PM

Yttrium said:
Huh? You asked us if we agree with Trump, then you say that the thread isn't about Trump? What?

That is what happens when you read a title and then not bother to look at both video's.

If you had, you would have realized Trump is not mentioned at all, but two presidents do speak on immigration.

Fervent · Saturday at 5:39 PM

Always in His Presence said:
That is what happens when you read a title and then not bother to look at both video's.

If you had, you would have realized Trump is not mentioned at all, but two presidents do speak on immigration.

That's called bait and switch.

Always in His Presence · Saturday at 6:05 PM

Fervent said:
That's called bait and switch.

Except I have NOT switched anything - still waiting for an on topic answer.

GoldenBoy89 · Saturday at 6:16 PM

Always in His Presence said:
Except I have NOT switched anything - still waiting for an on topic answer.

We no longer live in the worlds of the Obama or Clinton presidencies. Their speeches on any political subject, to include immigration, are only relevant to the times in which they were given.

Fervent · Saturday at 7:00 PM

Always in His Presence said:
Except I have NOT switched anything - still waiting for an on topic answer.

"the President" tends to refer to the one currently in office, not two former presidents. So the title naturally gives the impression that the subject would be the current president, not two former presidents.

dogs4thewin · Saturday at 7:07 PM

Nope, I believe that if someone has been here for years working hard paying taxes and has not otherwise broken the law those people should be left alone. Now, I have no issue at all with tightening the border up and no problem with deporting people who have broken a law other than being here, but if their only crime is being on U.S. soil and they are being productive members of soceity then I fail to see why resources should be spent finding them as they clearly did in fact come here for a better life. Particularly sense comig over here the right way is not easy if you do not have either means or connections.

DaisyDay · Saturday at 7:09 PM

Always in His Presence said:
Except I have NOT switched anything - still waiting for an on topic answer.

The question was do you agree with "THE" president. Generally, :"the" president usually refers to whoever is currently president. In the case of two different former presidents, which one would be "the" president?

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 7:14 PM

The idea that we need strong borders used to be a bipartisan position. Virtually everyone in DC saw "people sneaking in, undocumented" was a bad thing.

In addition to the vids you posted of Clinton and Obama, Chuck Schumer used to say the same.

Here's a throwback to way back

And even as recently as 2009:
"People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who enter the U.S. legally," Schumer said during a speech in 2009.

"Illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple. Until the American people are convinced that we will stop future flows of illegal immigration we will make no progress on dealing with the millions of illegal immigrants who are here now," Schumer said. "When we use phrases like undocumented workers we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration which the American people overwhelmingly oppose. If you don’t think it’s illegal you’re not going to say it. I think it is illegal and wrong."

This is what happens when everything draws on an "oppressed vs. oppressor" narrative that gets dictated by "pigment over prudence".

Boiled down to practical terms, what that means is "Since white people were oppressors in the past, since illegal immigration to the US overwhelming involves people who are non-white, a good progressive has a philosophical duty to take the side of people who have a little more pigment"

Always in His Presence · Saturday at 7:19 PM

Fervent said:
"the President" tends to refer to the one currently in office, not two former presidents. So the title naturally gives the impression that the subject would be the current president, not two former presidents.

That is why I put videos with quotes in the OP -

Commenting before looking causes confusion.

IN fact you didn't even have to open a link -

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 7:20 PM

dogs4thewin said:
Nope, I believe that if someone has been here for years working hard paying taxes and has not otherwise broken the law those people should be left alone. Now, I have no issue at all with tightening the border up and no problem with deporting people who have broken a law other than being here, but if their only crime is being on U.S. soil and they are being productive members of soceity then I fail to see why resources should be spent finding them as they clearly did in fact come here for a better life. Particularly sense comig over here the right way is not easy if you do not have either means or connections.

Based on that logic, that would defend the concept of "squatters" would it not?

If you owned a piece of property (that I wasn't legally authorized to be on), and I decided to move in.

"You shouldn't be able to kick me out if the only law I've broken was being here...apart from that, I've been productive and have broken no other laws"

Fervent · Saturday at 7:21 PM

Always in His Presence said:
That is why I put videos with quotes in the OP -

Commenting before looking causes confusion.

Click-baity titles that don't match the subject matter of the thread cause confusion

GoldenBoy89 · Saturday at 7:21 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
Based on that logic, that would defend the concept of "squatters" would it not?

If you owned a piece of property (that I wasn't legally authorized to be on), and I decided to move in.

"You shouldn't be able to kick me out if the only law I've broken was being here...apart from that, I've been productive and have broken no other laws"

The United States isn’t private property.

Fervent · Saturday at 7:29 PM

ThatRobGuy said:
The idea that we need strong borders used to be a bipartisan position. Virtually everyone in DC saw "people sneaking in, undocumented" was a bad thing.

In addition to the vids you posted of Clinton and Obama, Chuck Schumer used to say the same.

Here's a throwback to way back

And even as recently as 2009:
"People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who enter the U.S. legally," Schumer said during a speech in 2009.

"Illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple. Until the American people are convinced that we will stop future flows of illegal immigration we will make no progress on dealing with the millions of illegal immigrants who are here now," Schumer said. "When we use phrases like undocumented workers we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration which the American people overwhelmingly oppose. If you don’t think it’s illegal you’re not going to say it. I think it is illegal and wrong."

This is what happens when everything draws on an "oppressed vs. oppressor" narrative that gets dictated by "pigment over prudence".

Boiled down to practical terms, what that means is "Since white people were oppressors in the past, since illegal immigration to the US overwhelming involves people who are non-white, a good progressive has a philosophical duty to take the side of people who have a little more pigment"

Your sense of victimization is palpable...and it would be funny if it wasn't so lacking in self-awareness.

ThatRobGuy · Saturday at 7:37 PM

GoldenBoy89 said:
The United States isn’t private property.

The infrastructure the US has that is planned on a population basis
(our roads, bridges, schools, city services, etc...)

We do pay for that correct? And in order for those to be effective and sufficient, planners do need to have at least a rough idea of how many people they can expect to inhabit the area, correct?

If I were throwing a dinner party, and planning on providing food for everyone, and had a list of 15 names that were supposed to be showing up (documented), and 25 people show up because 10 people decided to come over without an invitation or letting me know prior so I could document it in order to make appropriate preparations or set the right amount of money aside, that would present a challenge, yes?

And before you dismiss that as a "silly analogy"

https://spa.sdsu.edu/_resources/files/documents/planning_with_unauthorized_immigrant.pdf

it is a real concern for city planning and service/budget allocation, and it's a concern/challenge that's disproportionately experienced by communities that are much closer to the border.

Hence the reason when certain governors made it a policy to transport undocumented arrivals to "sanctuary cities", those cities freaked out, and changed the narrative to "that's cruel that you'd send them here"

...which, when you think about what that actually means "Despite the fact that we openly said we'd be happy to do it, it's cruel that you'd ask us to do thing that we were expecting you to deal with 1000 miles away because you'd never called our bluff before"

Do you agree with the President on border enforcement and illegal aliens?

Jesus is the only Way

We're Still Here

Jesus is the only Way

We're Still Here

Mad Scientist

Well-Known Member

Jesus is the only Way

Well-Known Member

Jesus is the only Way

We're Still Here

Well-Known Member

dog lover

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Part of the IT crowd

Jesus is the only Way

Part of the IT crowd

Well-Known Member

We're Still Here

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Similar threads