Can anyone justify NOT having the Wall?

mchammer said:
This guy said it better than me but mine was shorter I guess:

Click to expand...


You gave us the tl;dr. :)

While obviously sad, if that's what Frenchmen and Frenchwomen want, so be it. Hopefully the few smart ones emigrate to the US and become citizens.
 
Ok. so if DJT does get re-elected and we happen to pull enough seats in congress. Do we do immigration better this time? Certainly, Remain in Mexico was fairly effective. The wall, however, was not. We need real and lasting solutions. Not feel good measures. I think the ONLY long term and realistic solution is mandating E-Verify and giving regular Joe SixPack a mechanism to go after an employer that is repeatedly hiring illegals.
 
guy4321 said:
lol

www.reuters.com

Biden is now deporting more people than Trump

Both President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump have pledged to return more migrants to their home countries, with differing approaches as immigration has emerged as a top issue in the coming U.S. election rematch.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com
Click to expand...
Biden's sock-puppeteering team will direct him to up the deportations until the first microsecond that it is no longer politically detrimental, at which point all directives to deport will once again be ****-canned, and we will return to a de facto open borders policy.
 
BrntOrngStmpeDe said:
I think it was more about the fact that the GOP had staked out a position and everyone on the left had to be against it no matter how little sense it made for them. If you are in the "big tent" for the democrats you have to support the whole big tent, even if many of the positions in that big tent are anathema to your typical beliefs. It is why black leaders in the Dem party have made pro-LGBTxxxx statements. Most don't really support it, but it is the price you pay to be in the big tent.
Click to expand...

Yep. They've done this by labelling anyone who disagrees with their agenda as not just incorrect but evil. If you oppose DEI, you're a racist. If you don't want to import terrorists and terror-supporting individuals, you're an Islamophobe. If you don't want drag queens hanging around little kids, you're a homophobe. If you don't want dudes showering with your teenaged daughter, you're a transphobe. If you don't like abortion, you hate women.

Of course, this can be a powerful weapon against your opposition if it's reinforced by the media (which it is), because it effectively keeps you from having to defend your position on the merits. How often do Democrats have to explain why it's good for drag queens to be around children or why abortion is a good thing? Never. Same goes for political parties in the UK and France when it comes to importing hordes of Islamic conquerors.

However, the downside is that it repels people who agree with most but not literally all of your agenda. They don't want to be called evil by their own party, so they don't join. If they have too much skin in the game not to join, then they give in to their party's mob and flip-flop. Consider Joe Biden or Jesse Jackson. In the '80s, they were pro-life and never would have gone along with the LGBTQ agenda. Now they're totally cool with both. Does anyone believe they have really had a change of heart? Of course not. They weren't teen-agers in the '80s. They were grown-*** men in their 40s who had well-considered beliefs that were very unlikely to change with age. Hell, they're probably grossed out by both. But they know that standing by their principles would cost them everything they have, so they sell out and go along with what they know to be wrong.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Yep. They've done this by labelling anyone who disagrees with their agenda as not just incorrect but evil. If you oppose DEI, you're a racist. If you don't want to import terrorists and terror-supporting individuals, you're an Islamophobe. If you don't want drag queens hanging around little kids, you're a homophobe. If you don't want dudes showering with your teenaged daughter, you're a transphobe. If you don't like abortion, you hate women.

Of course, this can be a powerful weapon against your opposition if it's reinforced by the media (which it is), because it effectively keeps you from having to defend your position on the merits. How often do Democrats have to explain why it's good for drag queens to be around children or why abortion is a good thing? Never. Same goes for political parties in the UK and France when it comes to importing hordes of Islamic conquerors.

However, the downside is that it repels people who agree with most but not literally all of your agenda. They don't want to be called evil by their own party, so they don't join. If they have too much skin in the game not to join, then they give in to their party's mob and flip-flop. Consider Joe Biden or Jesse Jackson. In the '80s, they were pro-life and never would have gone along with the LGBTQ agenda. Now they're totally cool with both. Does anyone believe they have really had a change of heart? Of course not. They weren't teen-agers in the '80s. They were grown-*** men in their 40s who had well-considered beliefs that were very unlikely to change with age. Hell, they're probably grossed out by both. But they know that standing by their principles would cost them everything they have, so they sell out and go along with what they know to be wrong.
Click to expand...

Republicans should just call them names back like murderers, pedophiles, thieves, and demons.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Far less productive if the media doesn't reinforce the narrative for you.
Click to expand...
Not only would they not reinforce, they would go on the attack, defining such a R as racist, xyz-phobic, or whatever.

When the media bootlicks for one side, and act like rabid attack weasels towards the other side, then all that can be done is to develop alternate media (AM radio, etc) and face to face rebuttal. Sadly, not many Republican voters are worth a damn when it comes to rebutting a media narrative.
 
To me (a border raised person who has been going to Eagle Pass every quarter for the last two years to hit the casino), the wall is a symbol of Liberal intransigence. They want amnesty for the Dreamers and help for the rest of them. We don't want illegal aliens over here. The Liberal construct of open borders (sanctuary cities, demonizing ICE and the Border Patrol except when Joe lies and says they endorsed him (unbelievable), voting rights in NY, benefits in California etc etc) is why the right wants a wall all the way across the border. It's that simple and until the Left gets on board with real immigration control (no more sanctuary cities, no benes' etc.) then I'm in favor of the wall along with ruthless deporations until someone gets the message.

And I will say this though, the Dreamers deserve some help but they are being held hostage by the Left, not by the Right, and I say this meaning the Left has no interest in curtailing illegal entry.
 
bystander said:
And I will say this though, the Dreamers deserve some help but they are being held hostage by the Left, not by the Right, and I say this meaning the Left has no interest in curtailing illegal entry.
Click to expand...

Two big issues with the Dreamers. First, they won't get any help unless it's part of a broader border security and immigration control effort that doesn't include a broader amnesty. It has to be geared toward something that overall reduces immigration - including legal immigration.

Second, there needs to be tight definitions on what is and more importantly what isn't a Dreamer and how one proves himself or herself up be a Dreamer. To me, a Dreamer is someone who came as a young child with his parents and is now an adult. A Dreamer is educated in American schools and speaks English fluently. And I would want to see certified school records to prove this. Affidavits or even live testimony from individuals isn't going to cut it.

Satisfy all that, and I think help for Dreamers becomes a real possibility.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Two big issues with the Dreamers. First, they won't get any help unless it's part of a broader border security and immigration control effort that doesn't include a broader amnesty. It has to be geared toward something that overall reduces immigration - including legal immigration.

Second, there needs to be tight definitions on what is and more importantly what isn't a Dreamer and how one proves himself or herself up be a Dreamer. To me, a Dreamer is someone who came as a young child with his parents and is now an adult. A Dreamer is educated in American schools and speaks English fluently. And I would want to see certified school records to prove this. Affidavits or even live testimony from individuals isn't going to cut it.

Satisfy all that, and I think help for Dreamers becomes a real possibility.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. But you know they would probably view the certification as a barrier as they had nothing but the clothes on their back when they crossed. At least, that will be the message. I don't know how someone in that position (legitimately) could ever prove it.
 
bystander said:
Absolutely. But you know they would probably view the certification as a barrier as they had nothing but the clothes on their back when they crossed. At least, that will be the message. I don't know how someone in that position (legitimately) could ever prove it.
Click to expand...

No reason for it to be a barrier. Just have the immigration lawyer subpoena the records from the school.
 
Garmel said:
Click to expand...


This is why deportation is so important. They and their children must be removed from this country. Otherwise the destruction, which has already occurred, will just get worse.

Milquetoast Republicans have to be shunned. They are essentially the rear guard of the Democrats. There are Republicans who are willing to fight this fight and they must be supported and the others primaried and replaced.
 
The single biggest reason deportations and the wall won't happen is money. both of those actions will require massive amounts of money. E-Verify would require a tiny fraction of the money, and would lead to illegal immigrants self-deporting once there are substantially fewer jobs available. I don't mind deportation being a portion of the puzzle just to show employers and illegal immigrants we really mean it this time. But to think we are going to deport 20+ million illegal immigrants, or even 2Mil, is pie-in-the-sky thinking.
 
BrntOrngStmpeDe said:
The single biggest reason deportations and the wall won't happen is money. both of those actions will require massive amounts of money. E-Verify would require a tiny fraction of the money, and would lead to illegal immigrants self-deporting once there are substantially fewer jobs available. I don't mind deportation being a portion of the puzzle just to show employers and illegal immigrants we really mean it this time. But to think we are going to deport 20+ million illegal immigrants, or even 2Mil, is pie-in-the-sky thinking.
Click to expand...

There is tons of money that can be redirected from its current destination that can be used for this. End government subsidies. No more funding NGOs that work for the Democratic Party. Cut headcount of the federal bureaucracy. Move the military to the US and use them to actual protect America instead of the American empire. You don't have to increase spending for this, you have to redirect the budget. E-verify can be a part of it, but there are drawbacks to that as well. I'm open to tactics.
 
BrntOrngStmpeDe said:
The single biggest reason deportations and the wall won't happen is money. both of those actions will require massive amounts of money. E-Verify would require a tiny fraction of the money, and would lead to illegal immigrants self-deporting once there are substantially fewer jobs available. I don't mind deportation being a portion of the puzzle just to show employers and illegal immigrants we really mean it this time. But to think we are going to deport 20+ million illegal immigrants, or even 2Mil, is pie-in-the-sky thinking.
Click to expand...
Of course we need e-verify, but at this point the Dems don't care about illegal aliens getting jobs. They just want their bodies in the US long enough to fill out paper work. With e-verify in action, Dems would provide even more handouts to illegals so they wouldn't have to work.
 
If DJT wins, he will only be POTUS for 4 years. Maybe we have someone follow him from GOP but the odds are not great. As a nation, we go back and forth. All of those things listed above are possibly good ideas, but most of them involve some politician having to vote to take away someone's money/job/etc. They might be able/willing to do that around the edges, but the type of massive defunding you are proposing will take 3-4 POTUS cycles. We need to solve illegal immigration now. It is THE biggest issue we have. We need to put it first in our priority list. In order to do this, we have to find the solution with the most bang for our buck. That is E-Verify. Not as the part of some prolonged 10-point plan but as the major push for the first 90 days.
 
It may just be selective hearing but it feels like I'm starting to see/hear a lot more noise about the declining population as a pro-immigration argument. These reports come out every now and then but it feels like they are using this as a talking point a bit more.

This is not a good reason to allow immigration. They always cite "expanding the economy" but that is a lame argument for the average citizen. Most of our societal problems owe at least part of their genesis to an influx of low skill, low asset, ESL people. Housing shortage, school crowding, school underperformance, crime, budget issues...are all at least in part due to immigration.
 
BrntOrngStmpeDe said:
It may just be selective hearing but it feels like I'm starting to see/hear a lot more noise about the declining population as a pro-immigration argument. These reports come out every now and then but it feels like they are using this as a talking point a bit more.

This is not a good reason to allow immigration. They always cite "expanding the economy" but that is a lame argument for the average citizen. Most of our societal problems owe at least part of their genesis to an influx of low skill, low asset, ESL people. Housing shortage, school crowding, school underperformance, crime, budget issues...are all at least in part due to immigration.
Click to expand...

This is correct. The problems are many times caused by mass immigration and then mass immigration is the proposed solution.

This is the way all government intervention works. The government does a thing. The thing causes a problem. The government blames something else as the cause and proposes more government intervention.

Inflation. War. Poverty. Social issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top