Now wait just a minute! This changes everything.

[OldWiseGuy]

The vast majority of Americans agree with allowing DACA folks to become citizens. HOWEVER, there needs to be a way to do this so that we do NOT encourage folks risking their lives to get their children across the border where they will then be citizens.

That is the sticking point of the whole debate. How do you, once again, grant amnesty to a huge group of illegals, and prevent another massive flood of illegals coming in (or remaining here, illegally) expecting the same amnesty to be granted them eventually.

 

[wing2000]

That is the sticking point of the whole debate. How do you, once again, grant amnesty to a huge group of illegals, and prevent another massive flood of illegals coming in (or remaining here, illegally) expecting the same amnesty to be granted them eventually.

Granting deportation protection to DACA recipients is not amnesty. Amnesty implies one did something wrong and are being pardoned. Obviously that is NOT the case with DACA recipients.

 

[mark46]

Trump cannot prove that he is a racist or not. Racism is in the eye of the beholder.

The analysis is with the voter. Some think preferring Norwegians to Haitians and Africans is racist. Some do not.

Some think it racist to think that Nigerians might want to stay in the US because they don't want to go back to their huts. Some don't think that this is racist.

As far as the Democrats, some can choose to believe that if Trump rejects the proposal of Senators, that it is the fault of the Democrats. IMHO, Trump did indeed reject their proposal, and gave his reason. He didn't want the Haitians staying in the country; he'd rather have Norwegians.

I don't know what should be said in response to that post, but there is no doubt about what is going on with the Democrat dance this week.

Sen. Durbin must not think much of average Americans to think they cannot see what's going on when Durbin sidetracks the DACA talks by accusing the president of racism and then, a couple of days later, publicly (again) announcing that a deal can be reached on DACA after all, if only the president would prove that he's not a racist by...

...you guessed it, by agreeing to accept Durbin's proposal on DACA without any complications such as the building of a wall!

 

[mark46]

That is the sticking point of the whole debate. How do you, once again, grant amnesty to a huge group of illegals, and prevent another massive flood of illegals coming in (or remaining here, illegally) expecting the same amnesty to be granted them eventually.

It is truly strange policy to want to kick out hundreds of thousands of young workers. I suppose that if we try hard enough, we can replicate the problems of Japan, and have an aging population with insufficient numbers of young worker to support the older generation.

The ADVANTAGE of the US for centuries has been the ability to attract young workers and young families. And NO, these immigrants were not the best educated; they were not those who looked like us. They would not pass trump's tests for entry. We should take the assignment of reading the words on the Statue of Liberty at least twice each day. [If that isn't enough, we should add the Beatitudes].

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Granting deportation protection to DACA recipients is not amnesty. Amnesty implies one did something wrong and are being pardoned. Obviously that is NOT the case with DACA recipients.

I'm referring to the time when DACA runs out and the subsequent law that will allow them to remain.

 

[Albion]

As far as the Democrats, some can choose to believe that if Trump rejects the proposal of Senators, that it is the fault of the Democrats. IMHO, Trump did indeed reject their proposal, and gave his reason. .

Not everything is a case of "in the eye of the beholder" however. In this case, it is all too obvious what Durbin was doing. And I might add that it's not reasonable to excuse his ploy simply by saying that Trump rejected the Dem proposals. That's because the Democrats proposed getting what they wanted and giving next to nothing in return. This, following all the talk that had preceded the meeting to the effect that bi-partisanship was what everyone wanted and meant to have.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

It is truly strange policy to want to kick out hundreds of thousands of young workers. I suppose that if we try hard enough, we can replicate the problems of Japan, and have an aging population with insufficient numbers of young worker to support the older generation.

The ADVANTAGE of the US for centuries has been the ability to attract young workers and young families. And NO, these immigrants were not the best educated; they were not those who looked like us. They would not pass trump's tests for entry. We should take the assignment of reading the words on the Statue of Liberty at least twice each day. [If that isn't enough, we should add the Beatitudes].

Perhaps we should study those words in their full context, and the original meaning of the statue itself.

 

[mark46]

I agree with you characterization that the president rejected the Democratic proposal. I believe that he rejected a bi-partisan proposal.

In any case, we'll know a lot more by the end of the week.

The bottom line is that DACA folk have been made safe by the Court until after the Fall elections. Allowing DACA kinds to become citizens requires no tradeoff. It is a winning issue for Democrats, at least IMHO. So, no the Democrats won't give Trump $20B for the wall, and eliminate relatives of immigrants from coming just so that we can pass a law that it hugely popular own its own.

Not everything is a case of "in the eye of the beholder" however. In this case, it is all too obvious what Durbin was doing. And I might add that it's not reasonable to excuse his ploy simply by saying that Trump rejected the Dem proposals. That's because the Democrats proposed getting what they wanted and giving next to nothing in return. This, following all the talk that had preceded the meeting to the effect that bi-partisanship was what everyone wanted and meant to have.

 

[mark46]

Perhaps we should study those words in their full context, and the original meaning of the statue itself.

It is 2018. The Statue Of Liberty and its words have a certain meaning to the vast majority of Americans. And yes, I understand that there are millions of Americans who do not hold these values.

 

[Albion]

I agree with you characterization that the president rejected the Democratic proposal. I believe that he rejected a bi-partisan proposal.

Well, because that goes to the heart of the matter, I suppose I need to know how the Democrat proposal can have amounted to something truly bi-partisan.

The bottom line is that DACA folk have been made safe by the Court until after the Fall elections. Allowing DACA kinds to become citizens requires no tradeoff. It is a winning issue for Democrats, at least IMHO. So, no the Democrats won't give Trump $20B for the wall, and eliminate relatives of immigrants from coming just so that we can pass a law that it hugely popular own its own.

That takes care of what I wrote in the first part of this reply, doesn't it?

 

[mark46]

Well, because that goes to the heart of the matter, I suppose I need to know how the Democrat proposal can have amounted to something truly bi-partisan.

The proposal rejected by trump was a negotiated bi-partisan proposal of Democratic and Republican Senators.

Trump Rejects Bipartisan DACA Plan

from a more Republican friendly source

Deal or no deal? Trump rejects bipartisan DACA & border security agreement

 

[Albion]

Actually, I kind of resent what you tried to do there, Mark, and I think you'll know what I mean when I say it.

On the issue itself, it looks, from the material in the VOA article, that the word "bi-partisan" was being used to mean nothing more than that there were both Democrats and Republicans involved.

That is not what I was referring to nor what the President and various Republicans meant when they welcomed the possibility of the talks being conducted in a bi-partisan fashion leading up to a bi-partisan agreement.

 

[cow451]

I don't know what should be said in response to that post, but there is no doubt about what is going on with the Democrat dance this week.

Sen. Durbin must not think much of average Americans to think they cannot see what's going on when Durbin sidetracks the DACA talks by accusing the president of racism and then, a couple of days later, publicly (again) announcing that a deal can be reached on DACA after all, if only the president would prove that he's not a racist by...

...you guessed it, by agreeing to accept Durbin's proposal on DACA without any complications such as the building of a wall!

That’s so cute acting like Donald didn’t drop the S bomb. Durbin, like Lindsey Graham doesn’t have an “evolving memory” like the chicken fried GOP supporters. Trump sidetracked it and it took attention away from the adults in the room who could work a deal.

I don’t care for government shutdowns and don’t think it will help the process. But Trump prefers chaos to process.

 

[Albion]

That’s so cute acting like Donald didn’t drop the S bomb. .

No one did that.

 

[mark46]

I don't understand the issue between us.

Republican and Democratic senators negotiated an agreement over several weeks. The expectation/hope was the president and Ryan would accept the proposal and move forward to pass it last week, before the final discussions on the CR.

I guess your idea is that the weeks of negotiations were simply a personal set of meetings and that the bi-partisan negotiations would come in meetings between the president and the leadership, as when the president met with the leadership before (the Chuck and Nancy agreement). If this was the case, there was little point in the months of negotiation. The president and leadership were already well into negotiations of their own.

Actually, I kind of resent what you tried to do there, Mark, and I think you'll know what I mean when I say it.

On the issue itself, it looks, from the material in the VOA article, that the word "bi-partisan" was being used to mean nothing more than that there were both Democrats and Republicans involved.

That is not what I was referring to nor what the President and various Republicans meant when they welcomed the possibility of the talks being conducted in a bi-partisan fashion leading up to a bi-partisan agreement.

 

[mark46]

As usual, we are being deflected by Trump's 4th grade playground vocabulary. The issue is that Trump prefers a policy of preferring white Europeans to black Africans. Also, he want no part of more Haitians, Guatemalans and Salvadorans; he want them to go home with 18 months.

This is a campaign issue for folks to evaluate, and for those running to comment on.

That’s so cute acting like Donald didn’t drop the S bomb. Durbin, like Lindsey Graham doesn’t have an “evolving memory” like the chicken fried GOP supporters. Trump sidetracked it and it took attention away from the adults in the room who could work a deal.

I don’t care for government shutdowns and don’t think it will help the process. But Trump prefers chaos to process.

 

[cow451]

No one did that.

A thousand pardons. We can agree on the S bomb being dropped.

 

[Albion]

I don't understand the issue between us.

Republican and Democratic senators negotiated an agreement over several weeks. The expectation/hope was the president and Ryan would accept the proposal and move forward to pass it last week, before the final discussions on the CR.

I guess your idea is that the weeks of negotiations were simply a personal set of meetings and that the bi-partisan negotiations would come in meetings between the president and the leadership, as when the president met with the leadership before (the Chuck and Nancy agreement).

No, I am saying what bunches of observers have said and the president himself seemed to agree with, that the Democrats claimed at the onset that they were interested in a mutually agreeable settlement. They said so, and I heard them say it.

BUT AFTER AWHILE, they reconsidered and decided to do what Durbin, as the spokesman, showed us. That is to find a way to make the president seem like a racist such that he would cave on the wall issue and accept the DACA proposal offered by the Democrats just to counter the charge. It was tailor made for the Democrats, after all, tying Hispanic immigrants to the race issue.

You know that Democrats have used this weapon many times and believe that if you call anyone a racist they will move heaven and earth in order, hopefully, to demonstrate that they are not actually racist.

The main reason it did not work in this case? Well that could be because Trump was determined not to be whipsawed that way OR else it's because Durbin, who should have known that he is on record as doing this sort of thing, was so bold as to lay out his strategy as nakedly as he did.

 

[cow451]

No, I am saying what bunches of observers have said and the president himself seemed to agree with, that the Democrats claimed at the onset that they were interested in a mutually agreeable settlement. They said so, and I heard them say it.

BUT AFTER AWHILE, they reconsidered and decided to do what Durbin, as the spokesman, showed us. That is to find a way to make the president seem like a racist such that he would cave on the wall issue and accept the DACA proposal offered by the Democrats just to counter the charge.

You know that Democrats have used this weapon many times and believe that if you call anyone a racist they will move heaven and earth in order, hopefully, to demonstrate that they are not racist.

The main reason it did not work in this case? Well that could be because Trump was determined not to be whipsawed that way OR else it's because Durbin, who should have known that he is on record as doing this sort of thing, was so bold as to lay out his strategy as nakedly as he did.

How unfair of Trumps opponents to use his very own words against him. Have they no shame?

 

[Allandavid]

Bad analogy, I'll try again.

Should a person who is here illegally be allowed to remain just because they are a 'good person' and they've been here for years?

Yes.