General politics

[ewen21]

SABR, I will not quote your last post because of that silly picture.  Let's have a discussion without that baloney, OK?

 

The fact that they are seeking asylum, prospecting for gold, have aspirations of opening up a casino, whatever....is immaterial to the fact that people are crossing illegally.  Period, end of story.

And this is not a single boat floating up from Cuba in 1982.  There is a distinction to be made from what is happening here and now as compared to anything else that has happened in the history of our nation.  To pretend these immigrants are like others before them is beyond irresponsible.

 

The ones crossing trying to find asylum that have been detained are in an unfortunate predicament if they came unprepared to go through the process and cannot provide the documentation necessary.  We cannot food, clothe, house and employ every last one; nor can we save them all.  If you want to cling to some utopian ideal that it is our job as America to do that then please do it without ignoring the letter of the law.  I am pretty stunned that you would call those crossing the border illegally "asylum seekers".  That connotation is an attempt to supplant the fact that they are ILLEGAL.  It is so not necessary and such a waste of words.

[Mr. Brooks]

SABR, I will not quote your last post because of that silly picture. Let's have a discussion without that baloney, OK?

 

The fact that they are seeking asylum, prospecting for gold, have aspirations of opening up a casino, whatever....is immaterial to the fact that people are crossing illegally. Period, end of story.

And this is not a single boat floating up from Cuba in 1982. There is a distinction to be made from what is happening here and now as compared to anything else that has happened in the history of our nation. To pretend these immigrants are like others before them is beyond irresponsible.

 

The ones crossing trying to find asylum that have been detained are in an unfortunate predicament if they came unprepared to go through the process and cannot provide the documentation necessary. We can food, clothe, house and employ every last one; nor can we save them all. If you want to cling to some utopian ideal that it is our job as America to do that then please do it without ignoring the letter of the law.

 

You say you are a lawyer. I am pretty stunned that you would call those crossing the border illegally "asylum seekers". That connotation is an attempt to supplant the fact that they are ILLEGAL. It is so not necessary and such a waste of words.

When you are fleeing for your life, you often may not have time to get all of your ducks in a row regarding the proper process for legal asylum.

In emergency circumstances, the law does allow people to seek refuge immediately upon crossing the border, which many of these detainees have done. Because the law does allow that, then I'd have to agree that, at best, it's misleading to call them all "illegals". Unless your argument is that they are all lying and aren't truthfully seeking refuge from a hostile situation, in which I disagree far too fundamentally to even continue with a discussion on the topic.

[Squirrel]

SABR, I will not quote your last post because of that silly picture. Let's have a discussion without that baloney, OK?

 

The fact that they are seeking asylum, prospecting for gold, have aspirations of opening up a casino, whatever....is immaterial to the fact that people are crossing illegally. Period, end of story.

And this is not a single boat floating up from Cuba in 1982. There is a distinction to be made from what is happening here and now as compared to anything else that has happened in the history of our nation. To pretend these immigrants are like others before them is beyond irresponsible.

 

The ones crossing trying to find asylum that have been detained are in an unfortunate predicament if they came unprepared to go through the process and cannot provide the documentation necessary. We cannot food, clothe, house and employ every last one; nor can we save them all. If you want to cling to some utopian ideal that it is our job as America to do that then please do it without ignoring the letter of the law. I am pretty stunned that you would call those crossing the border illegally "asylum seekers". That connotation is an attempt to supplant the fact that they are ILLEGAL. It is so not necessary and such a waste of words.

The majority of illegal immigrants in this country cross LEGALLY and stay beyond their allowed time. So, if you want to start there, that’s a good place to start. Illegal border crossings is simply not the crux of the problem.

[ewen21]

 

When you are fleeing for your life, you often may not have time to get all of your ducks in a row regarding the proper process for legal asylum.
In emergency circumstances, the law does allow people to seek refuge immediately upon crossing the border, which many of these detainees have done. Because the law does allow that, then I'd have to agree that, at best, it's misleading to call them all "illegals". Unless your argument is that they are all lying and aren't truthfully seeking refuge from a hostile situation, in which I disagree far too fundamentally to even continue with a discussion on the topic.

I will simply repeat what I just said in the post you quoted:

The ones crossing trying to find asylum that have been detained are in an unfortunate predicament if they came unprepared to go through the process and cannot provide the documentation necessary. We can food, clothe, house and employ every last one; nor can we save them all.

 

There needs to be a recognition of the sheer numbers we are talking about here.  More than 1,000 migrants were detained in ONE DAY at the border in El Paso alone.  Do you acknowledge that with such a mass exodus we simply cannot accommodate everyone?

 

if so, then where I am wrong?

[ewen21]

 

The majority of illegal immigrants in this country cross LEGALLY and stay beyond their allowed time. So, if you want to start there, that’s a good place to start. Illegal border crossings is simply not the crux of the problem.

Carole, that is not the pertinent issue.  Undocumented ones already here are here, as far as I am concerned.  With regard to this mass exodus from Mexico and Central America, that is another matter altogether.

 

Would you at least grant me that?

 

[Mike Sixel]

 

I will simply repeat what I just said in the post you quoted:

The ones crossing trying to find asylum that have been detained are in an unfortunate predicament if they came unprepared to go through the process and cannot provide the documentation necessary. We can food, clothe, house and employ every last one; nor can we save them all.

 

There needs to be a recognition of the sheer numbers we are talking about here.  More than 1,000 migrants were detained in ONE DAY at the border in El Paso alone.  Do you acknowledge that with such a mass exodus we simply cannot accommodate everyone?

 

if so, then where I am wrong?

 

I actually don't know the answer to that last question. We are the wealthiest nation ever. unemployment is at all time lows. Most of these immigrants will do work most USA born people won't even consider doing.

 

IMO, if we wanted to, we could probably take them all in......but that would require some really rich people to give up some money, and for comfortable urban/suburbanites to allow them to live close to them, and other things.....but yes, I think we could feed, clothe, and employ all of them. Probably. Not without some sacrifice, of course. And no, I'm not saying to let them live in our homes......

 

My guess is that the real answer is very complicated, and requires great commitment of time, money, people, and other resources.....so no, I'm not sure it is realistic that we can take them all in, not in the current world we live in.

[Mr. Brooks]

I will simply repeat what I just said in the post you quoted:

The ones crossing trying to find asylum that have been detained are in an unfortunate predicament if they came unprepared to go through the process and cannot provide the documentation necessary. We can food, clothe, house and employ every last one; nor can we save them all.

 

There needs to be a recognition of the sheer numbers we are talking about here. More than 1,000 migrants were detained in ONE DAY at the border in El Paso alone. Do you acknowledge that with such a mass exodus we simply cannot accommodate everyone?

 

if so, then where I am wrong?

I disagree with your lumping all of them together under the "illegals" umbrella.

I disagree with many of my peers that lean left, in that I do acknowledge that we can't save everyone, and that there needs to be a process that needs to be respected. We are a sovereign nation that has not only a right, but a responsibility to protect our borders.

 

However, I also have compassion and empathy for people who are desperate. Everything has shades of gray, things are rarely black and white.

 

Bernie Madoff stealing everything that a retired working class couple has spent their lives saving, for no other reason than pure greed, is different than a homeless veteran stealing a loaf of bread.

Both are crimes, both are wrong, but aside from that, they are in such different realms that they hardly warrant comparison. In the case of the hungry veteran, I ask myself how could we help this person so they don't feel the need to steal to eat?

 

Some of the problems in South and Central America that these people are fleeing from are problems we helped create. Some of the problems in Mexico that people are fleeing from are problems that we helped create. Our insatiable demand for the drugs their cartels supply, as well as our failed drug policies are huge contributing factors for the gangs, cartels, and government corruption that some of these people are fleeing.

So when you, or Trump, or people in the GOP, or talking heads ask if we are responsible for taking in these refugees, I say yeah, we do have some responsibility for some of them.

 

Let's crack down on big Pharma and doctors that contribute to our opiate addiction. That's not taking addicts off the hook, we are all responsible for our behavior, it's understanding that it's not as black and white as just saying no. That's not how addiction works.

Let's invest heavily into drug treatment. Why are we so eager to spend our tax dollars imprisoning these people, but if they want/need treatment they are on their own when it comes to paying for it?

Let's reevaluate how we process refugees, and legal immigration. Most on the right claim they only want immigrants to follow the law, and do it legally, but it's hard for me to believe that when they want to keep it hard and expensive to do so.

You keep bringing up how our ancestors immigrated here. I would like you to consider that it might have been much easier and cheaper for them to do it legally than it is now. They were desperate to make a better life for their family, as are many immigrants now.

 

I think if everyone is honest when they say they aren't racist and just want it done legally, then let's address these issues.

If we own and address our part in why people are fleeing from these countries. If we make it harder for their cartels to profit off our population. If we make it easier for honest, hardworking, desperate immigrants who just want to come here and contribute, to enter legally. If we do all of those things, then I'll be right there along side of you demanding zero tolerance for entering/staying here illegally. Until such time though, there is just too much gray area for me to lump the Bernie Madoffs in with the homeless bread thieves under one big "illegal' umbrella.

[ewen21]

 

Some of the problems in South and Central America that these people are fleeing from are problems we helped create. Some of the problems in Mexico that people are fleeing from are problems that we helped create. Our insatiable demand for the drugs their cartels supply, as well as our failed drug policies are huge contributing factors for the gangs, cartels, and government corruption that some of these people are fleeing.

If we own and address our part in why people are fleeing from these countries. If we make it harder for their cartels to profit off our population. If we make it easier for honest, hardworking, desperate immigrants who just want to come here and contribute, to enter legally.

I am sorry, but this is part of the 'all or none" postulate adhered to all to often.  Did we create SOME of the problems for these countries pertaining to the things your outline?  Certainly.  On the other hand, do corrupt governments and horrible policing on their part allows this to become an industry?  You better believe it.  Seems as if you can only point to US as being the culprit in this.  We can go on and on about what percentage of the blame either side deserves and how much of the pie should be relegated to "our responsibility" but that isn't even the issue.  We can be altruistic about this sitting at our computers far north of where all this occurs (I live in upstate NY), but there is an issue to address at the border  Period. This isn't about altruism anymore.  It isn't about you or me posturing about being on a moral higher ground.  

 

Have you actually tried to grasp the sheer numbers we are talking about here?  Have you sought out information from news affiliates near the border who actually report on this stuff from the front?  It sure is easy for us to talk as though you are on a morally higher ground from where you sit (I assume up north like me).

 

http://ktar.com/story/2527047/arizonas-immigration-crisis-take-a-tour-along-the-us-mexico-border/

It is not OUR fault this mass exodus is occurring.  I suppose a small part of it is owed to us (I grant you that), but you cannot use that as THE REASON.

 

This needs to be brought under control.  I guess you don't like the language I use, but I see it as an urgent problem.

[Squirrel]

Carole, that is not the pertinent issue.  Undocumented ones already here are here, as far as I am concerned.  With regard to this mass exodus from Mexico and Central America, that is another matter altogether.

 

Would you at least grant me that?

You were referring to illegals, so that’s what my comment was responding to. I’m not sure what you mean by ‘mass exodus’, but if your goal is to keep poor, desperate people in their own countries, work to make their lives better there so they don’t want to leave to seek asylum here.

[ewen21]

 

I actually don't know the answer to that last question. We are the wealthiest nation ever. unemployment is at all time lows. Most of these immigrants will do work most USA born people won't even consider doing.

 

IMO, if we wanted to, we could probably take them all in......but that would require some really rich people to give up some money, and for comfortable urban/suburbanites to allow them to live close to them, and other things.....but yes, I think we could feed, clothe, and employ all of them. Probably. Not without some sacrifice, of course. And no, I'm not saying to let them live in our homes......

 

My guess is that the real answer is very complicated, and requires great commitment of time, money, people, and other resources.....so no, I'm not sure it is realistic that we can take them all in, not in the current world we live in.

You live in Oregon, Mike.  Do you ever venture down to some of he cities in California?  Have you seen what is now going on in Los Angeles and San Francisco?  There are tent cities all over the place. We have war veterans having trouble getting the help they need and growing homeless issue in California.  How in the world is it we need to add a new burden and find resources for accommodating this mass of humanity coming across the border--over 3,000 strong on some days.

 

Think about that for a minute

 

[Badsmerf]

I agree the mass exodus of people from Central America is a real problem. I don't believe the problem lies with the people coming here, the problem lies with the bad actors in these regions.

 

Why aren't we helping? We spent trillions in the middle east, but haven't lifted a finger in Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras or any of the other Mexican countries. You really want a solution? Declare the war on drugs can take us to these areas and actually use our military force for something good for once.

 

Stop criminalizing people with nothing. No possessions. No money. Nothing but their lives. These people are a symptom of the problem, and it will continue until the region is stabilized.

[ewen21]

 

You were referring to illegals, so that’s what my comment was responding to. I’m not sure what you mean by ‘mass exodus’, but if your goal is to keep poor, desperate people in their own countries, work to make their lives better there so they don’t want to leave to seek asylum here.

YOu don't know what mass exodus means or you deny there is a problem with the sheer numbers.  Please clarify because I honestly am shocked if you answer yes to either.

[Mr. Brooks]

I am sorry, but this is part of the 'all or none" postulate adhered to all to often. Did we create SOME of the problems for these countries pertaining to the things your outline? Certainly. On the other hand, do corrupt governments and horrible policing on their part allows this to become an industry? You better believe it. Seems as if you can only point to US as being the culprit in this. We can go on and on about what percentage of the blame either side deserves and how much of the pie should be relegated to "our responsibility" but that isn't even the issue. We can be altruistic about this sitting at our computers far north of where all this occurs (I live in upstate NY), but there is an issue to address at the border Period. This isn't about altruism anymore. It isn't about you or me posturing about being on a moral higher ground.

 

Have you actually tried to grasp the sheer numbers we are talking about here? Have you sought out information from news affiliates near the border who actually report on this stuff from the front? It sure is easy for us to talk as though you are on a morally higher ground from where you sit (I assume up north like me).

 

http://ktar.com/story/2527047/arizonas-immigration-crisis-take-a-tour-along-the-us-mexico-border/

It is not OUR fault this mass exodus is occurring. I suppose a small part of it is owed to us (I grant you that), but you cannot use that as THE REASON.

 

This needs to be brought under control. I guess you don't like the language I use, but I see it as an urgent problem.

You are the one taking the stance that it's all or nothing on who is to blame.

 

I said we share in the responsibility. I never said it was our fault. Again, gray area versus black and white, which you seem unwilling to comprehend, both on this issue and the race issue. Having attempted to debate this honestly and intelligently, even though I suspected it wouldn't work out, I will now leave the waters that I shouldn't have bothered entering.

[Squirrel]

YOu don't know what mass exodus means or you deny there is a problem with the sheer numbers.  Please clarify because I honestly am shocked if you answer yes to either.

I don’t know what mass exodus means to you. And as I said, if we don’t want people coming here in record numbers, work to make their lives better there. These aren’t people that are coming here for easy, simple reasons. These are desperate people who have absolutely nothing. Nothing. Help to improve their circumstances and that may ease the numbers by a great deal of those coming here seeking asylum.

[PseudoSABR]

The question should not be whether it's our responsibility to help/aid refugees and their countries of origin; the question should be what is the best way to solve this humanitarian problem.  Who really cares whether the problem is our responsibility, it is on our doorstep, and we clearly are best situated to do something positive about it.

[ewen21]

 

I don’t know what mass exodus means to you. And as I said, if we don’t want people coming here in record numbers, work to make their lives better there. These aren’t people that are coming here for easy, simple reasons. These are desperate people who have absolutely nothing. Nothing. Help to improve their circumstances and that may ease the numbers by a great deal of those coming here seeking asylum.

Nearly 4,000 apprehended for crossing on March 19th alone

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/daily-border-crossings-undocumented-migrants-hit-13-year-highs-n987396

 

I understand they are desperate.  For what other reason would be doing this???

 

What do we do for them, Carole?  HOnestly.  Have you seen what LA and SF is looking like these days?

 

 

[ewen21]

 

You are the one taking the stance that it's all or nothing on who is to blame.

I said we share in the responsibility. I never said it was our fault. Again, gray area versus black and white, which you seem unwilling to comprehend, both on this issue and the race issue. Having attempted to debate this honestly and intelligently, even though I suspected it wouldn't work out, I will now leave the waters that I shouldn't have bothered entering.

 

Wrong, you injected the blame game in this discussion.  I am saying the situation is untenable and Bernie Sanders admitted there was a problem as well just about an hour ago.

 

If this continues at the rate it is going you will look back on it a year from now and say that ewen had a point.  This isn't about who is to blame. It is about addressing the issue of immigrants trying to rush the border in record numbers.

[Squirrel]

Nearly 4,000 apprehended for crossing on March 19th alone

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/daily-border-crossings-undocumented-migrants-hit-13-year-highs-n987396

 

I understand they are desperate.  For what other reason would be doing this???

 

What do we do for them, Carole?  HOnestly.  Have you seen what LA and SF is looking like these days?

What does the homeless situation in those cities have to do with the problem at the border? Seems like those are separate issues. And yes, I have been to both cities in the last 1-2 years. And yes, homelessness is a problem, everywhere, in this country. When did you last visit those cities? What did you witness first hand?

 

But you were asking about what to do about the record number of asylum seekers at our southern border, and I gave you a possible solution. Work to help better their situations in their home countries.

 

It seems to me we could do both.

[ewen21]

 

What does the homeless situation in those cities have to do with the problem at the border? Seems like those are separate issues. And yes, I have been to both cities in the last 1-2 years. And yes, homelessness is a problem, everywhere, in this country. When did you last visit those cities? What did you witness first hand?

But you were asking about what to do about the record number of asylum seekers at our southern border, and I gave you a possible solution. Work to help better their situations in their home countries.

It seems to me we could do both.

No, Carole, those two issues share the same kinds of concerns.  How do we find these people jobs, housing, healthcare, etc.....Not sure how you can't see there is a connection.  Even Cher does.

 

I did not see it first hand in LA and SF since I have not been to either city in over 10 years.  My sister and brother in-law go there because his parents live in Malibu.  My sister and her husband are both doctors with degrees from Ivy league schools and are both very moderate.  Neither like Trump.  Both were stunned at the state of affiars there. I have seen several documentaries on it and the videos of the problem were stark and endless.

 

Both sides of the aisle see the problem  The concern comes from the sheer numbers coming in. I suggest you look at Canada's immigration policy.  It is a whole lot more stringent and gives merit to those who speak English or French, are educated and have job prospects.  Is that wrong or racist?

[PseudoSABR]

Part of the way we could solve the homeless problem is universal healthcare so these people could get mental health/addiction treatment, a remedy totally useless to the refugee situation.  

[Mike Sixel]

You live in Oregon, Mike. Do you ever venture down to some of he cities in California? Have you seen what is now going on in Los Angeles and San Francisco? There are tent cities all over the place. We have war veterans having trouble getting the help they need and growing homeless issue in California. How in the world is it we need to add a new burden and find resources for accommodating this mass of humanity coming across the border--over 3,000 strong on some days.

 

Think about that for a minute

Because the GOP keeps voting against helping them, even though they supposedly love military people.... And yes, I've been all over this country. We have homeless camps here, way too many for the wealth this nation has.

 

Like I said, we have the resources, maybe, but we certainly don't have the will.

[Mike Sixel]

I want to be clear.... It would be better if we would help them in their homeland, imo. It would be better if we would help the poor here more. But, we aren't, and I can't see this administration helping make things better for poor people outside the US...

 

Also, it's not easy. I'm not absolutely sure about any good course of action.. .

[ewen21]

I'm with you SABR as far as solving the humanity problem. However, that doesn't dismiss the sudden urgent issue at the border--which affects the citizens our is supposed to represent. It isn't good to ignore either, but the more time sensitive issue for government needs to the one at the border. You aren't saying we need prioritize the more complicated of foreign affairs over that? Are you?

[ewen21]

I can't post from a phone. I'm sorry.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I'm with you SABR as far as solving the humanity problem. However, that doesn't dismiss the sudden urgent issue at the border--which affects the citizens our is supposed to represent. It isn't good to ignore either, but the more time sensitive issue for government needs to the one at the border. You aren't saying we need prioritize the more complicated of foreign affairs over that? Are you?

Is it any more urgent than the growing homelessness problem, or the rate at which people get addicted to opioids? Or as you continue to point out, the violence that happens among largely black communities in Chicago? Last I saw illegal border crossings are way done.  If we are going to pool our efforts I've got some better causes in mind.

 

You want solutions? Decriminalize the drug trade, taking the power away from the cartels.   Redirect aid from Israel to Central American countries.   Empower the UN to enforce transparent elections in Central and South America. Throw our support behind governments that work for their own people's interest, rather than American business interests.  Develop an ethical process for the entry and exclusion of asylum seekers.    Along the border, rather than building a wall, build unstaffed shelters with water and communication, encouraging people to contact the government.  More broadly, prioritize people coming from Central and South America over anyone else in the world.  Develop a plan for well-qualified people to enter legally at the border, without the upper-class need for paper work ahead of time.  Prioritize politically, straightening out corruption in Mexico and other nations.  Use trade benefits to leverage these countries, because it's their own business interests that the corruption survives.  Or anything but put people in ****ing camps, and taking their babies.  I'm shotgunning here.  But the notion there's not an ethical, affordable way to deal with the border crisis is disingenuous and dishonest. 

[ewen21]

SABR, sanctuary cities was the news of the day yesterday and I was attempting to speak about it.  Instead you want to ram about five other topics against the screen--no less important, but completely off topic.  That is not any kind of way to have a discussion.  You injected black crime into discussion and I find that to be interesting.  I posted a very long and detailed post in the "privilege and responsibility thread" on Saturday morning at that post basically napalmed the thread.  Nobody wants to be the next to respond.  I wonder why?  Maybe because in your heart of hearts you can't speak to me unless you are trying to disprove something I said?  If you want to talk about inner city blacks I have ideas about how to solve problems in that realm.  

 

With regard to my original point, democrats voted in 2015 to squash a bill called the "Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act" which would have punished cities by withholding federal aid had they not turned over immigrants who came here illegally.   However that isn't the issue now.  The issue is what do we do about those on their way and arriving at the border--with no intention of providing documentation?  They come to border and get detained.  What else are we supposed to do?  Hand them a party favor and say have a nice day, enjoy your freedom?  

 

This is about WHAT NOW to me.  I am not interested in mass deportation for those already here.  I guess they beat the system and as long as an illegal is productive and contributing work to give them citizenship.  What do we do NOW?  I don't think it is unreasonable to close the border while we hammer out something resembling a solution.  It could take months, but it would be temporary.  People on the left can jump up and down and stomp their feet, but they were the ones who believe in sanctuary cities.  Trump handed the ball off to them and they flipped out.  It only goes to show their rhetoric doesn't equal policy and we haven't got time for flowery rhetoric.

 

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

 I posted a very long and detailed post in the "privilege and responsibility thread" on Saturday morning at that post basically napalmed the thread.  Nobody wants to be the next to respond.  I wonder why?  Maybe because in your heart of hearts you can't speak to me unless you are trying to disprove something I said?  

 

Nobody wants to be next to respond because you have a tendency to mischaracterize those you respond to.  Upthread you did to Brooks.  He very, very clearly said we are part of the problem (he even tried to politely point out that you had mischaracterized him) and you ignored it and doubled down.  That's not a fair or productive way to have a discussion.  I would implore you again to make a greater effort not to do that.  I see a lot of posters going out of their way to take the best of what you contribute to further the discussion, you are doing quite the opposite.  On a difficult topic, it's hard to want to engage when the other person only further complicates it with an unfair tact.

 

In this discussion you could start with something simple - the current crisis is not about"illegals".  Every time you use that wording you are factually incorrect.  Asylum seekers are not illegals, they are following our legal process.  What is broken is our process.  Lumping this current issue with "illegals" is not fair to the conversation.

 

So, I'm going to do what everyone else is doing for you and take the best of this post and respond to it fairly.  I hope you endeavor to do the same with those you respond to:

 

The Democrats and Republicans need to swallow some pride, get off their stumps, and devise a real solution.  I worry our politics have become so toxic that even something like asylum cannot be handled with agreement and compromise.  Issues like this become a crisis when we create a politics without compromise or discussion.  We turn every mole hill into a mountain.  It's why I try so damn hard in this thread and the other to get those on the left to avoid the toxic swamp the right is dragging us into.  Independence, compromise, etc - these are the skills that help you govern.  It may not make you pure of heart for someone's ideology, but dammit - it stops nonsense like this from happening.

[PseudoSABR]

 

SABR, sanctuary cities was the news of the day yesterday and I was attempting to speak about it.  Instead you want to ram about five other topics against the screen--no less important, but completely off topic.  That is not any kind of way to have a discussion.  You injected black crime into discussion and I find that to be interesting.  I posted a very long and detailed post in the "privilege and responsibility thread" on Saturday morning at that post basically napalmed the thread.  Nobody wants to be the next to respond.  I wonder why?  Maybe because in your heart of hearts you can't speak to me unless you are trying to disprove something I said?  If you want to talk about inner city blacks I have ideas about how to solve problems in that realm.  

 

With regard to my original point, democrats voted in 2015 to squash a bill called the "Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act" which would have punished cities by withholding federal aid had they not turned over immigrants who came here illegally.   However that isn't the issue now.  The issue is what do we do about those on their way and arriving at the border--with no intention of providing documentation?  They come to border and get detained.  What else are we supposed to do?  Hand them a party favor and say have a nice day, enjoy your freedom?  

 

This is about WHAT NOW to me.  I am not interested in mass deportation for those already here.  I guess they beat the system and as long as an illegal is productive and contributing work to give them citizenship.  What do we do NOW?  I don't think it is unreasonable to close the border while we hammer out something resembling a solution.  It could take months, but it would be temporary.  People on the left can jump up and down and stomp their feet, but they were the ones who believe in sanctuary cities.  Trump handed the ball off to them and they flipped out.  It only goes to show their rhetoric doesn't equal policy and we haven't got time for flowery rhetoric.

Look, you keep changing the parameters of the discussion, so as to avoid addressing anyone's points.  Upthread you said a 1000 people were at El Paso in one day, and kept pointing out how many people were coming to the border, and blamed Democrats for having no ideas; I shot-gunned a number of ideas how to address, and you ignored them on the premise that discussion is strictly about sanctuary cities, which is disingenuous.  As Levi says, it's difficult to want to put out the effort to engage with you when you ignore much of the merit of what a poster has to say on whatever procedural grounds you decide but don't apply to yourself.  It's exhausting.

[LaBombo]

Everybody who keeps claiming there are no "illegals" and that ALL such persons are instead "asylum seekers"...

 

Please STOP! That phrase is "factually incorrect" when used to refer to any non-citizen without a visa attempting to enter the United States from Mexico.

 

First off... asylum seekers attempting to enter the U.S. through Mexico are NOT granted asylum automatically and instantaneously. Second, such status as a "seeker" does NOT grant entry into the United States.

 

So sure enough, just as common sense would dictate, an unlimited number of people can't stream into the United States just by entering a single word.

 

Third, those who do receive asylum are meant to be granted it ONLY as protection from dangers like political persecution. The United States does not have an 'economic asylum' policy, meaning that a very high percentage of "asylum seekers" do not qualify for asylum.

 

It's a good discussion, particularly the quandary of helping those fleeing poverty by allowing them into the U.S. vs. helping their home countries improve economically.

 

But much like the situation itself, the discussion is not served in the least by ignoring our current laws.

 

 

 

 

 

[ewen21]

Whatever Leviathan.  Stop it and stay on topic if you want to talk about this.

 

As far as this statement goes:

"the current crisis is not about"illegals".Every time you use that wording you are factually incorrect.Asylum seekers are not illegals, they are following our legal process.What is broken is our process"

 

OK fine.  Seems like you want to actually have a discussion now after your opening comments.  I will drop fence jumpers from the discussion, even though they are of great concern (vis a vis M-13 and the criminal element).  You want to talk ONLY about asylum seekers then FINE.  Let me hear you on that one.  Where do we place them?  Why did the democrats vote down a bill that would have withheld federal aid to sanctuary cities (if they didn't turn over illegals) in 2015 and turn around and oppose placement of detained asylum seekers in sanctuary cities?  That was my initial post regarding Corey Booker's comments in reaction to Trump's power play.  Booker changed his tune.  Did he not?  It shows a level of hypocrisy demonstrated by this new rabid far left dogma that is poisoning the discourse.  

 

And by the way.....

On Mr. Brooks, I did not ignore his theory as to why they are all coming up here.  This was is what I said:

"Did we create SOME of the problems for these countries pertaining to the things your outline? Certainly."

 

After that, I don't there is much to say until he get better develop precisely how he came to that conclusion.  Make me believe it's a bigger reason than the horrible job they do policing down there and the corrupt governments they have.  Unless he can explain to me how America is more responsible for the disarray I will get into it a lot more.  The bold is all he is going to get.  If you want to take the baton from him and develop that idea then go for it.   The sad part is, I am done after this post.  I am due at Albany International and am flying out of town for vacation.  I hardly want to engage with you when I am chilling in the sun.

 

 

One last thing.  I made a very extensive post in "privilege and responsibility".

Watching you and reading you operate in this forum for almost two years I am stunned you didn't jump all over what I posted.  I gave you a lot to chew on and devour.  YOu relish the opportunity to go back and forth.  Evidence of that exists everywhere in this forum.  Could it be that you actually agree with much of what I said and cannot bring yourself to admit it?  I think that is the case. Mr. Brooks did something I have never seen you do in all debates and entanglements you have gotten into: he made a concession.

 

We can pick this up next week.  Lighten up.