Ideally, there will be no illegal immigration now or in the future. This should be one of the main aims of whatever will be passed.
I believe that mass deportation, while perhaps the preferable outcome, is probably not going to happen and is a poor starting point for negotiation.
I believe the fairest outcome for everyone is that if you are here illegally now, and you would like to stay, you have to sacrifice something for forgiveness for prior lawbreaking. As such, the proper goal should be allowing dreamers (and others) to stay, if they have no criminal background, etc, and have documentation to prove having been here for more than say, 5 years, then they are eligible for permanent residence but forfeit the path to citizenship forever. If you would like to be a citizen, you must do it how everyone else has to.
I feel awful for dreamers, and feel sympathy for illegal immigrants, the former did not choose their path in most cases, and the latter by and large are just trying to do the best thing for their families and themselves. That said, you have broken the law and added to a culture of lawlessness and disrespect for American laws and institutions.
Under this principle, the illegal immigrants have a choice, and the choices do not adversely affect the American citizens and legal immigrants in a practical sense.
Under any immigration deal, we must significantly increase funding and staffing for immigration courts to ensure future law breakers are sent home ASAP. We must also fund the wall, even though I do not believe it will do much of anything in actuality, it will be symbolic of the American resolve to actually deal with illegal immigration.
We might also consider doing what most other nations do: throwing illegal immigrants in jail instead of playing stupid games with deportation, etc.
We must adopt a merit based immigration system. Immigrants should be permitted to come here, prioritized by their expected benefit to the rest of us. If we have to accept higher legal immigration numbers in exchange for stopping illegal immigration, I believe that is a fair trade.
Finally, we must make assimilation into American culture, including making English the official language of the USA, a priority of our immigration system. If you deem living in America as being better for you than living in your home country, it ought to be expected that you adopt our values, customs, language, and respect the culture you came to join.
What do I expect to happen? Mass amnesty and citizenship, or nothing, the preceding ordered by likelihood.
I think the hurricanes offer an opportunity for DACA folks to demonstrate their allegiance to the USA. Why not have them petition Mexico to allow 30 million displaced Americans a place to live until things begin to settle down. Mexico could provide lots of housing, food, etc and cushion the blow of Irma and Harvey. And, no, I am not kidding. If Irma is going to be as destructive as they say, 30 million people will have great difficult returning to what is left of their home for weeks if not months.
The whole “What are you going to do, deport 11 million (or 20 million) people? Huh? Huh?” is a false argument:
All that would need to happen is to EMBARK on a program of finding and deporting anyone illegally present, back to the country of their citizenship, and without regard to any other factor except their legal status.
Once this begins, in other words once people realize that the law is the law and that the U.S. means business, the great majority of people who have been playing the system all this time will set their affairs in order and make their OWN way back to their home country rather than wait for the knock on the door in the middle of the night.
Stop the p$ndering.
It has worked before under the Eisenhower administration.
Of what relevance is this to DACA? They register, we know where they are because they apply and get papered. There are about half a million. Bears to relation to anything you’ve raised here. Does that make you a troll?
I side with Trumpers on this issue, but not for the reasons many of them have.
To me it’s simply a matter of law – if you’re here illegally, leave. The end.
If a U.S. citizen goes to France and just stays there, what do you think happens to them ? Here’s what … a fine, deportation, and you can’t come back for 1-3 years. That’s for U.S. citizens.
Do you think France would just let you hang out in France and start working there ? Yeah, try that and see what happens. Try that ANYWHERE and see what happens.
As far as I’m concerned if it’s the law, we either mean it, or we need to change it. I’m actually okay with relaxing immigration law, but I want it to be something that is done intentionally and in Congress.
This is, btw, a losing issue for Democrats, so in that sense I would almost be sad to see the issue resolved, but it needs to be resolved.
Actually, I’ve done lots of work in other countries and they are good with it. And the Dreamers are not here illegally — indeed, they have permits that can be renewed and they are properly papered. Even DJT says if the 6 mos comes and goes without action he will personally revisit their status. And how is this an issue for Democrats more than it is for Republicans? Both parties talk the same game on this.
Still rooting for Dow 7000? Still want to see US markets lose two-thirds of their value? You cannot credibly call yourself conservative. You are a radical, likely a Marxist bent on destroying America, starting with her markets. Who do you think you’re fooling when you make statements like that, wishing to wreck havoc on America, hoping for a depression? You are sick if it is anything other than parody.
100 people get stranded on a deserted island and find 1000 special gems in a cave and start to use them for trade, they start out by insuring that everyone has exactly 10 of them. One day a few of the people in the main village start to issue debt to one another in the form of small intricately sewn pieces of cloth that represent the gemstones as a contract, one piece of cloth represents 1 gemstone. They trade back and forth with this cloth, and people start to use them as a currency. In total, they borrow into existence contracts worth 1000 new gemstones, so now there are 2000 gemstones in circulation, 10 each that were originally handed out and traded, and 1000 new cloth ones that are traded among a smaller group of people, but increasingly through people’s FAITH trading in this new cloth expands.
So what just happened …
If you’re in the “in group”, you are able to parlay TRUST into MONEY, and devalue the currency held by others simply by acting in unison with like minded people in the main village. You’re also involved in a kind of scheme where you are relying on increasing amounts of FAITH by the general populace in the derivatives, because the more you can get them to believe in the proxy instead of the actual commodity, the more control you have over the island’s economy. First it is gemstones, then its is the cloth that represents the gemstones, then as FAITH increases it becomes other contracts representing the cloth, and then contracts representing the contracts, and it expands, ever increasing the amount of currency in circulation. Soon, what started as 1000 gemstones is effectively 10000, or 20000, or 100000, it increases as TRUST increases and people’s FAITH in their currency increases.
So that’s a good thing, you say, but the problem is that not everyone is involved in the game. The people in the smaller camps can’t issue the new currencies, don’t have the capacity to market their derivatives in such a way that people have FAITH in them, and they lose purchasing power as this system expands, because their original 10 gemstones that were equal with others are now worth much, much less in a system that has 1000 real gemstones and 100000 derivatives of gemstones.
Increasing amounts of TRUST is not always good, because when it goes too far and people have too much blind FAITH the potential for panic increases. Debt bubbles like the one we are living in now are created and have the potential to pop and cause widespread mayhem. The primary mechanism that keeps this in check are periodic downturns in debt, where rational people who are self-interested start to question the derivatives and pull back. It is these times of pull back that weed out the weak derivatives, get rid of unsound ventures, cause people to question the FAITH that they have in the system, cause them to learn and become educated about the system they are participating in, etc. Blind FAITH is not a good thing, and excessive amounts of TRUST are dangerous for the system as a whole.
Last point, it’s stupid to be a cheerleader for the stock market, because it is a market, where something is traded, and whether prices go up or down is not “good” or “bad” except from specific points of view. There’s nothing inherently “good” about markets going “up”, the only real “good” is markets that are predictable and stable. Now that there is so much potential for panic markets are in a precarious position.
(…and if it was parody I’d never admit to it lol …)
Oh, and an important note – I’m totally serious about labor, worker’s labor does increase in value during a deflation. Labor is like real estate, or gold, or “stuff”, it is a commodity that can’t be printed into existence … meaning it is one of the “things” that the whole system is actually about, and the reason the whole system exists in the first place.
The more I here your Dow 7000 cry, the more it is clear it grows the value of illegal immigrants: Rural areas, cash and barter, manual labor grows in value. Are you a troll?
1)Commerce is the delivery of goods or services (labor) for a cost.
2)Illegal labor is illegal Commerce.
Some may feel as labor is a commodity that can’t be printed into existence as you say, that is bull shit.
If you counterfeit money the Secret Service comes after you.
If you counterfeit goods the FBI comes after you.
If you use illegal labor you have devaluation in wages.
Then you make it worse by saying they have rights so subsidize it.
If a Democrat labor Union used illegal labor and committed tax, insurance and other fraud as do employers and contractors do even built Government jobs with it would that be Organized labor committing crimes , uh that is “Organized Crime, a free market principles that you believe in?
Now if Members of a Home Builders Associations use this illegal labor just as the Organized Labor Unions do and refer this labor amongst members in the locality rather than bid out to legal labor is this not Organized Crime also?
Let me make this very clear to you.
Licensed Contractors in Va are conspiring with Unlicensed Contractors and aiding them in committing Class 6 Felonies, we have not even discussed the payroll, tax and insurance fraud, we are just in licensing Statutes.
Home Builder Associations take in Millions maybe Billions annually in tax dollars from the Federal Government for Section 8 housing projects.
You may talk down to labor no matter to me, I am confident in my person. I work many a weaker man in the ground.
I expect that you fall Into that category also.
I my lifetime experience of being labor it is that the poo sissy who talks down to labor is not man enough for the task themselves.
And apparently, if you try to get into Myanmar illegally, they will blow you up. News reports say that they are putting landmines on their border with Bangladesh.
Michele Malkin has writen an exceptional article on the DACA problem and the hand wringing Republicans are parrotting the Democrat talking points. Let’s quit calling them children. Most of them are in their twenties and thirties and not wanting to be sent back to Mexico. The major claim is they don’t know the language, which I doubt, unless their illegal parents spoke only English at home. My suggestion is to give them a crash/refresher course in Spanish as a second language and deport them. Two things can happen when they get back to Mexico. They can get in line with their fellow dreamers and fellow citizens (remember they were born in Mexico to begin with and are citizens there). Secondly, they decide to use what they have learned in the USA and begin fundamentally changing Mexico to be exceptional like America. As opposed to what Obama wanted to do to America! http://michellemalkin.com/2017/09/06/there-is-no-such-thing-as-a-deserving-dreamer/
Good luck with all that. You’re on the fringe because voters aren’t buying whatever it is you’re selling. Even DJT is on their side. He’s calling for federal legislation to cement their status, and now he’s working with Democrats who can deliver votes with discipline, Your divisive approach to governance has run its course and exposed the TBE fringe elements for what they are: Party terrorists who’ve caused their party to squander the governance opportunity that fell in their lap.
Party terrorists? Seriously? Someone who wants to uphold the rule of law and wants to enforce border security is a “party terrorist”? Wow Nancy Pelosi and Saul Alinsky must have taught you well.
I did not know I was a terrorist. I am just a guy who has worked the polls, been a unit chair, put up signs etc.
Never met either of them, but I did read that a Republican leader or two was passing out copies of Rules for Radicals as organizing primers. Frankly, Nancy Pelosi could stalk either side of the aisle, I object to her regardless, and now Paul Ryan says this morning that DACA Dreamers should “rest easy” — his words, not mine. No apologies: Party terrorists, ripping it apart from the seams.
He is a faux conservative otherwise called a RINO or outright Democrat.
And you, Warmac, are you supporting Republican legislators these days? How’s that working? Supportive or back to expressing disgust about the whole lot of them?
I absolutely support Republican legislators these days. I do not support those who claim to be Republican legislators and act against the interests of their Republican base. There are far too many GOPe who are swamp dwellers who say wonderfully conservative things and then go back to DC and do quite the opposite. Say what you will about Trump, he is exposing the duplicitous game.
Michelle Malkin retweeted this story to 800,000 followers.
At least with Executive order 24 in Va., the Democrats want the taxes from the illegal employment.
You know what is funny about this story, Fellow TBE-ers? These Democrats are all about “children (i.e., Hispanic children) should not have to pay for the decisions made by their parents.” BUT! when it comes to home schooled children who want to participate in high school sports, then these same Democrats do not give a shit if kids (i.e. white children) have to pay for the decisions made by their parents. Then it is OK to punish the kids. As long as they are the kids of white conservatives.
One more time? I am slow and am completely missing the pony hiding under this pile. Neither do I understand how Democrats are any different than Republicans who support DACA given there are quite a few in each party, and that includes POTUS (if he is to be believed).
This is Horse shit!!!!!
Wall funds. ” ” !!!!!!!
Mexico pays ” ” !!!!!!
Lies,lies,lies all ” ” !!!!!!
Not going after illegal employment or employers means just pandering .
All the more reason to vote for
Ralph Northam this November the facts and what is happening in the field today in Va with McAuliffes Executive Order 24
and investegations is a great move !!!!!!
This morning as I walk out the door to build homes , employ , pay taxes , pay insurance and all the other things that come with Legal Commerce, I hold up both fingers to tell you ; oh Republicans “your #1″ so to speak.
If you do ‘t stop illegal employment then President Trump appears to be the rudest, dumbest Miss America; ” I want to help all the little children in the world”
I want my vote back now!!!!
None of this is a surprise. Lifetime Democrat and friend of the Clintons, Trump is doing what so many of us expected, almost as if on cue. But he did his smoke and mirrors and pied piper thing, and many foolish people followed right along.
I predicted that Trump would not demand actual Obamacare repeal, would not see through the building of a wall and that he would deliver amnesty, and that looks to be exactly what he is going to do. Those who bought Trump’s whole “Lyin’ Ted” act will have a lot to answer for when this is all done.
That is where I am at , the Lyin Ted crap, he got me hook , line and sinker.
Then not one ounce of concern for debt, all lies, lies , lies.
This was a golden , No Red, White and Blue opportunity for the Republican Party.
Now it is just Red, White and Green ( Mexico Colors).
The hugging of the flag by Trump was not of love of Rape!
“I will not beholden to a lobbyist but the the forgotten men and women of America”
Lyin Ted my big Ole Butt.
As Trump said at many of his self promotional pep rallies;
“Throw the Bum Out”, “ya go on and get him out of here”, “must be a Hillary supporter”
Let your divisive nature flow unmitigated! This is TBE, after all, and it’s the alpha and omega of divisive rhetoric. If you want to see why Republicans cannot unite and achieve an agenda, you’ve come to the right place. It proved an eye-opener for me.
That we have now come full circle to see Trump ally with Democrats is no surprise, really. The definition of dysfunction would be to keep working with Republicans expecting a different result; He’s crazy, but highly functional, for better or worse.
If they weren’t insane hypocrites, they would have nothing to complain about.
The ultimate example of Democrat hypocrisy in their “kids should not have to pay for the decisions of their parents” argument is the simultaneous Democrat support of elective abortion.
No one supports abortion. It is a woman’s right to control her body that is supported, and empowered by a 6-3 Republican-led Supreme Court in Roe. For example, Posner is a conservative justice now leaving the bench and he has written extensively about his distaste for abortion but supportive of its status as a civil right.
I have not seen any Democrat make the argument against elective abortion in recent memory – – have you?
And I have seen many Democrats defend it as a right, tooth and claw. An interesting thing to do for people who don’t support the right to elective abortion…
I’ve encountered the opposite and am surprised you have this view. It is very Irish Catholic to oppose abortion but defend the right to one. Was reading retiring Justice Posner’s decision in the Wisconsin abortion rules case just the other day (it was on occasion of his retirement). He expressed conflict personally but none as regards the constitution. I like all the Amendments and the rights the Constitution accords.
How does one oppose cold-blooded murder while defending the right to perpetrate cold-blooded murder?
Once again: I have not seen any Democrat make the argument against elective abortion in recent memory.
If there are any Democrats who actually believe that ‘all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights’ and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, they sure have done a good job remaining tight-lipped about it.
Because medical science insists the fetus is not viable throughout the first trimester, and so the woman’s rights are greater than a theoretical life not yet set.
I am against capital punishment and abortion, but I concede the constitutional argument behind them both, and each occurs under carefully arranged circumstances.
Your last paragraph is just ignorant because party affiliation does not prove a defining factor in the cases. The Rowe court was Republican to the core.
A conceived human being is not theoretical but a fact of science that also carries moral weight.
I have not seen any Democrat make the argument against elective abortion in recent memory. It is true that some Republicans (don’t know what party, if any, you embrace) defend elective abortion as you do. Saying “I oppose it but support the right to it” is defending it.
By analogy, in the 1850s if a person had said, “I oppose slavery but support the right of slaveholders to keep slaves,” would you say that person was truly in opposition to slavery or just trying to gain the feeling of moral bravery while in truth facilitating a morally abhorrent practice?
Moral but not legal, meaning that you are entitled to your own moral views but cannot impose them upon others without legal authority in this area, which does not agree with your moral view that life commences at conception.
This is true regardless of political party. Indeed, as I observe, the Rowe court was Republican nature.
I reject both and all party affiliations, taking candidates one by one, case by case.
My bottom-line: I support the rule of law, as do so many here. It is of the essence to a free people in a civilized society.
I support rule of law as well. You will not find me acting as a vigilante on this issue.
However, you will also not find me equivocating on the fact that Roe v. Wade was a miscarriage of justice and that the way things stand now are inconsistent with human rights and totally at odds with our founding principles. Furthermore, they are a moral blight on our nation which will carry natural consequences for generations to come in much the same way that the failure to abolish slavery until near the end of our nation’s first hundred years is still carrying consequences.
Personhood begins at conception and elective abortion is murder. By now the blood of many millions of murdered children cries out from the grave. Although we don’t live up to our own stated moral standard as a nation and never fully will (they are lofty principles), we do have a standard and it is a good one. We would do well to keep striving toward it, closer to liberty and justice for all – rather than acting as if these things are mere matters of opinion and preference.
I would add that the 60 to 70 million abortions have destroyed the next generation of workers and employers. Thus, we allow illegal immigration to fill in the blanks. Europe is doing the same things.
Interesting opinion and point of view you have. While my own is at odds with yours, I nonetheless find it interesting to read.
The 60 to 70 million is not an opinion. As far as filling in the blanks, EU leadership has specifically stated that they need immigrants to replace the aging population. Finally, we abort about 1 million + potential human beings in the USA every year since Rowe vs Wade.
It is certainly an opinion if it postulates the number of additional people if each was carried to term and born healthy and assumes no compensation for these numbers by those of reproductive age. It is a wild guess as to the effects, and further guesses that without legal alternatives illegal means might be employed. It is overall pure guesswork, guesswork we need not perform in the US as the rule of law is quite clear as to what is permitted.
Thanks for your POV.
What you call fact is in fact opinion. Your opinion, neither more nor less. Not acting as if — it is pure opinion and preference.
I suppose that (to be consistent) you will also affirm the statement that the rightness or wrongness of American slavery is also a matter of “pure opinion and preference.”
The rule of law prohibits slavery as the law defines slavery. This is not a matter of opinion or preference. The correctness or incorrectness of the law and its definitions are matters of opinion. Some prefer it be harsher and more broadly defined; Others are of the opinion the penalties should be lighter and for more narrowly proscribed behavior.
It should be clear by now that you play games with what you call facts. Likely you feel your attempts at sophistry make your arguments more persuasive, or that they exhibit the zeal and the passion you feel for your POV. Nonetheless, your POV remains your own, your moral judgments at odds with the rule of law and therefore not to be imposed upon others.
Involuntary servitude was objectively wrong before it was illegal.
I am not stating that my moral judgments should be imposed upon others prior to a change in the law. What I am insisting is that this is a matter of objective moral dimensions – that it is not relative or culturally conditioned, and I am saying that the law ought to be changed to align with what is right. Whether that will happen remains to be seen. Yes, it is my belief or point of view. But whether or not my assessment aligns with it, truth does actually exist … and this is certainly not a point of view.
It is objectively wrong in retrospect, but your attempts to assign definitives — and in retrospect — is simply a crutch, and further it is sometimes appears mre like a stick you want to employ to bludgeon others into agreement with you, and then action towards your ends. Such is the long, slippery slope of government, which starts with a subjective idea and slips towards imposition upon others.
I am making two claims that I believe to be objectively true, and that I believe everyone already knows to be true in their heart of hearts:
1) Elective abortion is morally wrong, murder – regardless of when in history it happens or where in the world.
2) Laws permitting elective abortion are inconsistent with the United States’ Declaration and Constitution.
Call it bludgeon if you like. I am putting out these claims out there and people need not agree with them. However, truth does not bend to our opinions, so if I am right, I am right and no amount of argument or sophistry will change that. Conversely, if I am wrong, I am wrong, and no amount of argument on my side will change that.
Thank you for conceding my point that slavery was objectively wrong in retrospect (meaning that it was objectively wrong even back when the laws or public sentiment did not recognize it as being so).
Hindsight is always 20-20. It was not objectively wrong at the time it was practiced, but in the rearview mirror of history we concede the error — always easier in the rearview mirror.
I do not agree with your claims. I consider them subjective and not at all objective. Even a 6-3 Republican appointed court thought otherwise.
Seeking definitives is childish. The world is never so neat and clean as you might like. Celebrating hindsight is easy, like calling sporting events after their conclusion. Is the wager window still open? Of course not.
So you say slavery was not wrong in 1850, is wrong (according to the law) now, but is not really wrong? If so, I disagree.
It was thanks to people of moral clarity prior to the advent of the consensus on slavery that you now (partially) celebrate that the changes for the better came to be political reality.
I find your likening of the battle for and against the institution of slavery to a sporting event to be disturbing but telling.
I also disagree that trying to discern truth is childish. In fact, I cannot imagine a more grown-up pursuit than that.
So you disagree with Socrates, who said the more you know, the more you know you know nothing?
Disturbing but telling that history gone by is just that — history gone by, sporting event or whatever? You are engaged in sophistry, pure and simple. It means nothing that I used sports as an example — an equal example would be election results. How does that alter the narrative?
You want a definitive where none exists. You want to transform your views on morality into doctrine. You are as dangerous as the worst of liberals, no different because you both want to turn your views into rock solid dictate. Shame on on you.
I don’t disagree with Socrates, but I feel as though you do. Making an assertion is not the same thing as knowing. Socrates believed in Truth. The way or extent to which truth is knowable is another thing, but this is the foundation. Socrates when he made that statement about the more you know, the more you know you know nothing, was talking about the enormous size of Truth, its extent – – not the lack of its existence.
There is a huge gulf between the view of those who (like liberals, generally) believe truth is relative (meaning truth is non-existent – a philosophically untenable position) and those who, like myself, believe truth exists and can be found in many cases.
Could not disagree more with your first paragraph, and the second is its own can of worms. The rule of law settles things, especially when there are differences of opinion over right and wrong.
Following your thinking, we might still have slavery. People should not have even tried to abolish, you suggest.
Sorry, I can’t buy that. Nor can I buy the proposition that moral truth does not exist.
Ridiculous sophistry on your part, and yes, there are still places in the world that practice slavery and worse, so a little less assumption on your part would prove helpful to you and your moral judgments. Why are you even writing when you should be out fighting the immorality that occurs daily before our eyes in present day?
Your claim that I suggest they “should not have even tried to abolish” is proof you are guilty of the most absurd misrepresentation. Pure sophistry on your part. I merely observe the relative nature of your mis-judgments, seemingly free-floating in geography and time.
Indeed, your proposition stands to reason that monuments to slave owners are monuments to immorality and must therefore be destroyed as remnants of an immoral past, which I find absurd. I could not care less what happens to public art, moral in retrospect or not. It is all history and should be displayed (or not) at the will of the people. Engaging in retrospective second-guessing is foolish.
Meanwhile, get on it! You’ve a world of slavery to abolish. Travel there forthwith! And while you are at it, India’s “caste” system needs a swift kick in the ass. I know you can do it — get over there. Time’s a wasting!
Not any more. The scientific community has created an artificial womb that allows viability from day 1.
Perhaps those conceived within such a womb will be treated differently. Or not. It’s a matter for courts interpreting the constitution resulting in rules of law. I’m sticking with the rule of law.
I see you changed you comment. At this point, the argument about “abortion choice” is becoming less and less viable thanks to science. As far as I am concerned, a woman generally has a choice about protecting against an abortion. The pill has been around for 50 years and is quite effective as well as low cost.
I did not change my comment. I am sticking with court rulings as regards interpreting the rule of law.
Also: Reconsider what you wrote. An artificial womb does not per se alter the viability of a fetus when removed from the womb, which was as I recall the point in Rowe and other cases.
Well, you have just described the basis for another judicial action. If a fetus can be detached from a woman and placed in an artificial womb where it can be grown to become a baby then so be it.
If we buy the totality of your argument, babies can be killed outside the womb until some arbitrary age. No baby is truly viable without care. It will die of starvation, dehydration, or disease. Obama made the post birth argument and it was quickly suppressed by the MSM.
Not my argument. It’s the rule of law.
Democrats will fight like mad to protect a convicted mass murdered from the death penalty and, at the same time, will fight like mad to slaughter the innocent in the womb. It takes a great deal of mental gymnastics to excuse such thinking but they do it under the guise of choice – which they then refute when it comes to education of children. There is no logic in their emotion driven decisions. I conclude that their social ends utterly overwhelm anything associated with true compassion.
Correct. In my observation and those of many others, Democrats are compassionate only “in theory.”
The Democrats think that government is compassionate and people aren’t. They think the government welfare state is compassionate and individual charity state is foolishness.
Ultimately, they think the Constitution and Bill of Rights is negotiable and their socialist totalitarian ideas are incontrovertibly correct.
Correct. It is not government’s job to be compassionate. Government’s job is to establish justice, order, and security. This does a great deal of good for everyone. When government enters the compassion business, it almost always does more bad than good.
And yet virtually every time some Democrat politician wishes to sell something to the public, he or she always has a little kid standing by to be patted on the head. This is how I know that we are being fed a bunch of leftist garbage that will eventually cost more and do ever greater damage to the citizenry. Obamacare is but the latest of the disasters.
1) Every DACA or illegal already has a criminal background. How can they not, as their very being here is illegal????
2) I can’t stop laughing. You really think the Democrats are going to go for any restrictions that will not allow the illegals to vote? You’re drunk, again???
3) We are $20 TRILLION IN, PAYING $1 BILLION A DAY IN INTEREST ALONE. And now, you want to increase the size of government with an illegal immigrant kangaroo court, and you want me to pay for it???
Illegals already have a path to citizenship. Go home and get in line.
They are here legally. They have renewable two-yr permits. If not, why did Trump give them time and another renewable period? Corporate America needs an intelligent, capable workforce and they will fight for this one. Or did you think lazy white rural Americans hooked on meth can claim jobs in microchip manufacturing plants?
Back to your crazy one Jesus, one bible, uber Alles religious claims, JP. Study your bible, whichever one it is this week. Salvation lies within.
“…lazy white rural Americans…”? All my neighbors work hard. They are not all white, but they are rural. Are there lazy crank junkies here in rural America? Yes, but there are plenty of lazy bums in urban areas. You sound like some kind of elitist with that comment. There are loads of good rural people.
Many in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
It is always those city boys crying I can’t find Americans to do work.
A City boy gets a construction loan to build a spec home ( home for sale on speculation ) then calls the county boys for footings and framing , the county boys elevate the estimate knowing that the lazy city boy just wants to play golf all week.
Check out your local home builders associations website, I bet it is all Corporate. These fat cat , lazy city boy contractors are all around ready to exploit illegal aliens and sell you a piece of crap home.
There is a difference in sweet apples and rotten potatoes.
Say no to dope, Say no to white collar builders after all they are just amateur golfers , not tradesman —– Republicans.
Really? “Lazy white rural Americans?” Based on what evidence are you citing the laziness? It amazes me how readily white liberals are so eager beaver to run down whites, but heaven help the conservative who cites FBI crime statistics citing the high crime rates among blacks and Latinos.
Well, mark, you’d want to direct that question to a white liberal instead of me. If you are what passes for a conservative, heaven help the rest of us.
If it weren’t for white Americans going to work and paying their taxes, the welfare state would collapse. They dominate the workforce and attempts to suppress their work ethic under the guise of “white supremacy” is the stuff of the radical socialist left who want to discard the Constitution and Bill of Rights and replace it with the great utopian socialist nightmare.
But nativist! 😉
You’re on to something, Zach. The key bit not played up here though is the citizenship angle. If Democrats and their allies in the GOP were serious about being compassionate, and about reaching a solution that doesn’t unnecessarily punish people who have peaceably invested their lives and families in this country, then a solution that doesn’t involve giving millions of lawbreakers the right to vote wouldn’t be an issue. But it is an issue…it’s THE issue for them, and will ultimately be the crux of any long term arrangement to deal with the problem. If we don’t want it to end badly, we need to do it while we still have ostensible majorities in both houses, and a nominally allied President.
In a state like California, they already vote in virtually every election. There are no checks on whether a vote is legal – quite the contrary because the Democrats controlling California know that all of the illegals vote for them. The only time this would become an issue is if it were exposed in scandal. Note that the Trump commission on voter irregularities is being stonewalled by democrat majority states.
Yeah sure. Yours is the same crowd that tells us whites commit more crimes than blacks, whites use welfare more often than Hispanics, and that “conservative corporate America” controls Hollywood and the Media. Yeah, sure. Whatever you say, SD.
Statistically, there are more white people and the numbers follow. And because Hollywood and the media are generally public companies and on the market — we good conservatives believe in markets, don’t we? — it is easy to agree to the point.
go ahead and cite your evidence that any large group tells you any of that.
More importantly, why do you care the color of the people who do anything? I suggest you care more that your money is not going to make welfare recipient rich – it is going to make the rich richer. This is where you should worry because no matter what, the people you think are you protectors are using you.
He is the bearer of fake news.
but don’t start letting facts influence your posts – we would have to stop laughing at you
Might I suggest my article previously publishe on the Bull Elephant. http://thebullelephant.com/?s=california+as+prologue
Thanks for suggesting it. No wonder you never get enough votes to even influence the outcome of elections. Best wishes for your future endeavors, this one isn’t working.
Rino wants this bike.
There are Indian Motorcycles
Then there are Indian givers!
I share your love for bikes also, I have a nice piece myself as I am sure that many Republicans do.
I was just able to purchase mine by legally employing Virginians not subsidizing imported labor.
Well stated article. Obviously, the leftist who post on this site shoot the messenger.
No check? It’s called a provisional ballot and every poll watcher of both parties knows how to insist on one. You are beyond the fringe on this. It is not a matter of opinion. You are simply wrong.
My sister lives in California. Her son and daughter live around. They see the game election after election. Wink -wink is the name of the games.
Mac is correct. It takes only one poll watcher to insist a vote be checked before counting. A provisional ballot sends it to court if it’s determinant of the result.
Wink, wink is only the name of the game if all sides wink, wink — in other words, highly unlikely. But, hey, your sister lives there, and her son and daughter live around, and they see the game election after election, so I’m sure you know better. Of course.
Last night Chris Matthews interviewed Tim Ryan ,
they discussed new construction and ending illegal employers.
If we are going to run up the debt even 1 dollar should we not go after the illegal employer?
You know, ROI ( return on investment )
McAuliffe gets it;
Executive order 24
You guy talk of law breakers is half hearted.
The Va Dems. and in particular Ralph Northam should add to his add campaign, imagine this-
Ralph Northam on Va televisions and radio, Ralph says President Trump’s immigration stance is not broad enough for Va. another reason why we need your vote this November. If you elect me, my promise to all Virginians is that we will be proactive in the pursuit of illegal employers in Va, we will put an end to payroll , insurance and tax fraud through illegal employment in Va.
Santurary for ALL CRIMINALS in Va. will end.
President Donald “Pelosi”,”Ryan”,
Trump must go.
Trump is doing not one darn thing about what causes illegal immigration.
Compassion is Major league BS!!!!
I don’t see you of hear you speaking up against their exploitation through illegal employment.
No you are not native. you are foreign, foreign to the rule of law.
Vote Northram November 2017
Unless Ed has a policy for McAuliffes Executive Order 24 .
He don’t have a policy , does he????
That is the sound of crickets.
Democrats will never accept any restraints on future voters – Reagan learned that when he traded amnesty for a wall the was never funding by congress. The Republican base is convinced that honoring lawbreakers is a bad idea because they know such an honor will encourage more lawbreakers. My approach is if a DACA individual has committed a criminal act in this country, even jaywalking, he is deported without benefit of trial. If he returns, he is imprisoned for a minimum of 10 years and then deported again.
How do you know if someone has committed a criminal act in a country with due process if there is no trial? You do realize that is unconstitutional, don’t you, and that anyone on our soil benefits from constitutional rights, don’t you? Isn’t it you who reminds that Fields shall be presumed innocent of driving his car into a crowd in C-ville? But you would somehow propose we suspend the constitutional rights of someone on our soil?
The young, legal alien that purchased the gun , then shot all those students at Va Tech should NEVER had the Constitutional right to purchase firearms.
Madison was clear: If you are on our soil, you owe us a temporary allegiance and we owe you due process.
I feel that the Tech. shooter
being a foreigner and other foreigners may not fully understand the right to own fire arms , that is all there.
I am always 100% show favor to due process, though the flip side I 100% expect due process to see the proper Court. Enforce labor law! It is completely ignorant for Va. to issue safety/DOLI violations to unlicensed contractors and then have the VEC allow them a free pass in audits even though those crews have employees , you know the same employees he caused these violations, pure stupid!
I for the life of me cannot understand why Republicans are not on board in ending the illegal employment as a whole.
The fraud that it brings is astonishing.
I can think of many to lobby as to why illegal employment must end; taxes, the insurance industry, child support, the Va Conservation league of Voters ( uranium mining ).
Do you think it is the Federal Governments obligation to provide Va with unemployment funding , when the Commonwealth allows , yes allows an underground labor market?
This is where I separate from Republicans, Conservatives, Christians, right wing nut jobs and lazy amateur golfer/Builders.
I believe in due process;
Republicans don’t !
Madison is but one individual. To be blunt, if you are on our soil, you owe us constitutional allegiance in exchange for the individual rights you enjoy. If you come here illegally, then you should be treated accordingly as is the case with terrorist and terrorist courts that expedite removal.
What you wish were true or theorize should be true is at odds with what is true:
Section One, 14th Amendment to the Constitution: No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
U.S. Supreme Court, Zadvydas v. Davis (2001): “due process” of the 14th Amendment applies to all aliens in the United States whose presence maybe or is “unlawful, involuntary or transitory.”
Supreme Court ruled in Pyler that Texas could not enforce a state law that prohibited illegally present children from attending grade schools, as all other Texas children were required to attend: “The illegal aliens who are … challenging the state may claim the benefit of the Equal Protection clause which provides that no state shall ‘deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.’ Whatever his status under immigration laws, an alien is a ‘person’ in any ordinary sense of the term … the undocumented status of these children does not establish a sufficient rational basis for denying benefits that the state affords other residents.”
Almeida-Sanchez v. United States (1973): All criminal charge-related elements of the Constitution’s amendments (the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and the 14th) such as search and seizure, self-incrimination, trial by jury and due process, protect non-citizens, legally or illegally present.
I think we are saying the same thing albeit with different words. As far as these decisions, they change nothing in regards to how swiftly a court can act to deal with illegality. Special court have been established for the organized crime and for terrorist acts. These courts have the ability to quickly establish the basis for judicial action and, for that matter, executive action as well. Obama used decision like this to clog the courts. Trump is using them to expedite and execute court activities. Both were and are judicially appropriate.
Our preference is decidedly against secret courts, but normal rocket dockets are fine, thus the Eastern District of Virginia.
Unfortunately, secret courts have become necessary. The mafia would knock off witnesses once discloser occurred. Terrorist, especially international terrorist organizations associated with Islam (and now antifa) cannot be dealt with in the open because of the same problem. I don’t like secret courts because they are the stuff of dictatorships.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant, indispensible to the judicial process and the rule of law.
Yes it is, however, political correctness and judicial minutia have made it hard or even impossible to get to the truth. We have given far too much room for guilt to prosper and made it far too difficult for innocence to prevail. This is the problem with perpetual bureaucrat government, the kind that has come to dominate the national scene.
The removal of terrorists by special courts is already happening. DACA courts could do something similar. There is nothing unconstitutional about swift and certain justice – quite the opposite. You want to prevent justice and reward illegal behavior by clogging the already over burdened justice system. I don’t.
Are you referring to Duterte in the Phillippines? Or is this the ultimate manifestation of your Death Wish / Bernie Goetz scenarios? You cannot make this stuff up! Extra judicial justice from the guy who aggressively reminds us that Fields is innocent unless proven guilty after we watched him drive a car at high speed into a crowd of people, killing one of them and maiming over a dozen. Yes, even Fields deserves due process, as does anyone on our soil accused of criminal behavior.
So why do Republicans not go after illegal employment? Oh , they use their freedom not too.
Then they are Party of Tyranny, plain and simple!
In colonial America, an individual convicted of murder was given ten days to get their affairs in order prior to a public hanging. Today, that same murder is likely to be in the court system for years before a trial and conviction, and then given decades worth of appeals before a sentence is executed (if at all).
Things were once so very much simpler in some ways, and more complex in others. Thanks for the look backwards.