Let's be honest: Most Dems and Some Pub politicos Support Illegal Immigration and Open Borders

[year2late]

I don't lie, at least intentionally.

Interesting you lie about this as well.

If you know you have an issue with the truth, you would take a moment to verify your "facts" rather the spewing baseless accusations - I mean if you really cared about the truth.

 

[Bucky]

Interesting you lie about this as well.

If you know you have an issue with the truth, you would take a moment to verify your "facts" rather the spewing baseless accusations - I mean if you really cared about the truth.

I don't lie but structure my argument by adjusting the facts more favorably to my position. I verify the facts that I want verified.

 

[maxparrish]

im for letting most every one in except violent criminals could we just focus on keeping out and removing those

whats the heritage class ****?

I define heritage working class as those working class American families legally present and rooted in America prior to 1965. Composed of Americans with predominate American identity and culture, the heritage Americans are those whose (minimally) grandparents were native born and mostly or entirely assimilated.

In general, heritage Americans can trace their roots to the historic nationalities that founded and populated America throughout most of its history (e.g. most Europeans, Jews, West Africans, Native Americans, etc.).

Unfortunately, Heritage Americans under the sponsorship of Ted Kennedy (and others) began the process of cultural and identity suicide when immigration laws were changed.

 

[year2late]

I don't lie but structure my argument by adjusting the facts more favorably to my position. I verify the facts that I want verified.

Adjusting the facts?

Dude, you lie. You lie alot. You have even admitted to me to me that you did (remember you gave me permission to post your PMs)

The problem is that you slowed down for a bit, now you justify by saying you "adjust the facts"

Well you "adjusted the facts" to lie about me. Doesn't make it less of a lie.

Kind of like Trump...most of your wounds are self-inflicted.

 

[Bucky]

Adjusting the facts?

Dude, you lie. You lie alot. You have even admitted to me to me that you did (remember you gave me permission to post your PMs)

The problem is that you slowed down for a bit, now you justify by saying you "adjust the facts"

Well you "adjusted the facts" to lie about me. Doesn't make it less of a lie.

Kind of like Trump...most of your wounds are self-inflicted.

"adjusting the facts" was the wrong words to use.

I more like baste facts to help cater to my positions. It is no different to adding sugar and cream to your coffee or wearing makeup. None of that is lying.

 

[independentusa]

I didn't claim anything regarding most liberals not caring. I stated (bolded and underscored for emphasis):

"But there are not areas of commonality - most politico dems either don't care or have a zero tolerance policy towards such efforts.

Should you grasp the meaning of "politico dems" and the meaning of the words "either" and "or" you won't miss it - if you can't grasp, no point in continuing.

Then give me a link to a [[oll that supports that politico dems don't care or have zero tolerance towards the efforts to secure our borders,please?

 

[year2late]

"adjusting the facts" was the wrong words to use.

I more like baste facts to help cater to my positions. It is no different to adding sugar and cream to your coffee or wearing makeup. None of that is lying.

Yet you outright lied about me.

You should not need to lie to back up your debate. But apparently you do.

 

[maxparrish]

Instead of putting your trust in a right wing rag like the Washington Times, try reading the actual bill:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/109th-congress/house-bill/6061

Note that it was sponsored by Peter King, a Republican. And v it was very specific as to exactly what little sections of fencing were included:

"(1) from ten miles west of the Tecate, California, port of entry to ten miles east of the Tecate, California, port of entry; (2) from ten miles west of the Calexico, California, port of entry to five miles east of the Douglas, Arizona, port of entry (requiring installation of an interlocking surveillance camera system by May 30, 2007, and fence completion by May 30, 2008); (3) from five miles west of the Columbus, New Mexico, port of entry to ten miles east of El Paso, Texas; (4) from five miles northwest of the Del Rio, Texas, port of entry to five miles southeast of the Eagle Pass, Texas, port of entry; and (5) 15 miles northwest of the Laredo, Texas, port of entry to the Brownsville, Texas, port of entry (requiring fence completion from 15 miles northwest of the Laredo, Texas, port of entry to 15 southeast of the Laredo, Texas, port of entry by December 31, 2008)."

As for the votes from what you've labeled "the racist xenophobes in the democrat party":

Pelosi, Durbin, Murray, Baldwin, Cantwell, Cardin, Leahy, Menendez, Reed, and Sanders all voted Nay.

Gillibrand, Hirono, Kaine (he was governor of Virginia at the time), Klobuchar, Tester, Whitehouse, and Casey weren't elected until 2006, so they would not have been there for that vote. Shaheen wasn't elected to the Senate until 2008. Blumenthal wasn't elected to the Senate until 2010. Same goes for Coons, Manchin, and Merkley. In fact, it would have been easier for me to list the two or three you actally got right.

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/...ote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00262

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2006/roll446.xml

Perhaps you could explain to me why conservatives continually forget that liberals often look stuff up. Did you really think we were as ignorant as you seem to be?

For someone so intent on bashing a poster for their reliance on a conservative news source, its clear that no one should rely on you for a correction.


First, "what little sections" that were included weren't little; presumably they were 700 miles in total. Did you even bother to look at a map of those sections before spouting off ? For example, you do know that the distance between Calixco and Douglas are in the range of hundreds of miles, right?

Second, the groups the poster listed were those Democrats who supported the Bill, which is distinctly different meaning to those who voted for it while in Congress.

Third, I don't have the time nor inclination tracking downing each of those mentioned to find the nature of that support (votes, public statements, etc.) BUT I do note that the poster seems substantially correct. Among those supporters:

Sherrod Brown
Thomas Carper
Diane Feinstein
Bill Nelson
Chuck Schumer
Debbie Stabenow
Ron Wyden
Joe Biden
Hillary Clinton
Harry Reid
Barrack Obama

So it would seem that either these Democrats supported it in good faith, and for cynical reasons no longer do. Or they supported it insincerely for political reasons, but now reveal their actual hostility to secure borders.

In any case, clearly the fact that you "look stuff up" and "read it" doesn't mean you actually understand what you read, or prevent you from writing as if you worked for a "left-wing rag", either.

 

[maxparrish]

Then give me a link to a [[oll that supports that politico dems don't care or have zero tolerance towards the efforts to secure our borders,please?

I have already supplied undisputed examples and links suggesting widespread indifference or hostility to those efforts to stop illegal immigration and securing the borders - including links to a two liberal and/or left authors who have openly acknowledged and discussed their bretherns attitudes.

I suggest you read them. In the meantime, I will add more while you do your homework.

 

[Myview]

There are some far left liberal activists who advocate for open borders. Rank and file Democrats and left leaning Independents are generally for secure borders. Of the three "voices of Democracy" that the OP lists, 2 I have never heard of and one Angela Nagel is Irish. Ms. Nagel is well respected and is mostly associated with expertise on the Alt Right. She is a Dublin based academic, journalist, and contributor to magazines.

 

[Nickyjo]

Like half of the posters here.

One liberal’s view: There has been illegal immigration for thousands of years. Jews entering Jericho, settlers in the US encroaching on Indian land in spite of treaties prohibiting it, Brits and French moving into Africa, Americans illegally bringing slaves into Mexico (Texas), some of the settlements in the occupied territories are no doubt illegal, and on and on.

Illegals coming into the US are investors. Much like businesses that move into Latin America because they can get a better return on their investment, illegally paying bribes at times to get around local laws, illegals coming here are trying to get a better return on their investment of their labor. Saw a Labor Party MP challenge Bill Buckley once, “Why can capital cross borders and not labor?” The weak response was that migration of labor has side effects, as if foreign investment by capital does not.

Bottom line, if you don’t like illegal immigration, have your son strap on a leaf blower, send your daughter to clean hotel rooms, and write Congress and tell them to increase the minimum wage and change anti-union legislation.

 

[Bucky]

Bottom line, if you don’t like illegal immigration, have your son strap on a leaf blower, send your daughter to clean hotel rooms, and write Congress and tell them to increase the minimum wage and change anti-union legislation.

We will have robots do that soon enough.

 

[blarg]

I define heritage working class as those working class American families legally present and rooted in America prior to 1965. Composed of Americans with predominate American identity and culture, the heritage Americans are those whose (minimally) grandparents were native born and mostly or entirely assimilated.

In general, heritage Americans can trace their roots to the historic nationalities that founded and populated America throughout most of its history (e.g. most Europeans, Jews, West Africans, Native Americans, etc.).

Unfortunately, Heritage Americans under the sponsorship of Ted Kennedy (and others) began the process of cultural and identity suicide when immigration laws were changed.

is there anything good about your identity that i should want to emulate it and have it as part of my culture?

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

OP is true, but my understanding is that between our rapidly aging population, and lower birth rates we have a situation where we need to import unskilled labor to provide the services we need long-term.

We could certainly be more honest about this, and simply expand legal immigration to a point that would give us the benefit, and accepting that actually reducing immigration would be devastating to the economy in the long run.

It's about our economy weathering these demographic shifts, and requires long-term planning.

That's a tough sell to many Americans, who broadly prefer the "**** you, I got mine!" school of thought.

It wouldn't be the first time by a long shot. In the 1940's we sent buses down INTO Mexico to recruit braceros to help work the fields.
Then about ten years later, in a scenario reminiscent of Captain Renault in "Casablanca", we were "shocked to find that we had wetbacks working the fields" and we promptly rounded them all up and dropped them off in the interior Mexican desert and left them without food, water or transport back to where they'd come from.

Operation Wetback



And that's the reason no one takes our immigration system seriously, or respects it, it's the hypocrisy.
If we'd at least be honest, there might be more respect. If it was more reasonable and accessible, there might be a higher level of participation in the LEGAL form of immigration.

Human beings by nature tend to want to be law abiding, when the law is just, and the system isn't a big fat cruel joke.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

We will have robots do that soon enough.

Look at you, thinking it stops at leaf blowers.

 

[OscarLevant]

In 2006 and 2013 respectively, the racist dem xenophobes agreed to 700 miles of border fencing.

Racist dem xenophobes like Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Ron Wyden, Debbie Stabenow, Sherrod Brown, Durbin, Murray, Baldwin, Bennet, Blumenthal, Cantwell, Cardin, Casey, Coons, Gillibrand, Hirono, Kaine, Klobuchar, Leahy, Manchin, Menendez, Merkley, Murphy, Reed, Sanders, Shaheen, Tester, Warner, Warren, Whitehouse, etc. etc. etc., all agreed on:

"... 700 mils of fencing (including double-layer fencing), infrastructure, and technology, including at ports of entry, should be deployed along the Southern border ..."


"In 2006 Congress passed the Secure Fence Act, which mandated the construction of multilayer pedestrian fencing along about 600 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border. It passed with big, bipartisan majorities: 283 votes in the House and 80 in the Senate. Some top Democrats who are still in the Senate today supported the fence: Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Ron Wyden, Debbie Stabenow, and Sherrod Brown.

Just the next year, Congress made clear it didn't really mean what it said. The new law was amended to make fence building optional.

In 2013, Congress got back into the fence game. The Gang of Eight comprehensive immigration reform bill included something called the "Southern Border Fencing Strategy." It called for 700 miles of at least single-layer pedestrian fencing along the border. ...

... The U.S.-Mexico border is nearly 2,000 miles long. Significant parts of it are so rugged that barriers are simply unnecessary. During the campaign, candidate Trump called for 1,000 miles of wall. " ...

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...embraced-the-southern-border-fencing-strategy


How stupid 100% of the liberals are for not even knowing what the racist xenophobes in the democrat party voted on.

Trump wants the entire southern border walled. My argument is that it is foolish to even attempt, let alone spend the many billions.

NO one is arguing that fencing, where appropriate, isn't warranted. we already have a few hundred miles of it and no one is arguing against improving that fencing and that much Dems support which is what you are referring to, but making a specious argument from it.

But that is NOT what Trump wants, he wants the entire border walled ( or the vast majority of it ) which
cost many billions more than 5 he is asking for. He is framing the argument that the 5 billion is the "start" of a vast wall.

That tosses your argument out the window.

 

[Barnacle]

Trump wants the entire southern border walled. My argument is that it is foolish to even attempt, let alone spend the many billions.
NO one is arguing that fencing, where appropriate, isn't warranted. we already have a few hundred miles of it and no one is arguing against improving that fencing and that much Dems support which is what you are referring to, but making a specious argument from it.
But that is NOT what Trump wants, he wants the entire border walled ( or the vast majority of it ) which
cost many billions more than 5 he is asking for. He is framing the argument that the 5 billion is the "start" of a vast wall.
That tosses your argument out the window.

You got a link to where he's talking about building/replacing more than 1,000 miles?

 

[OscarLevant]

You got a link to where he's talking about building/replacing more than 1,000 miles?

well, he hadn't actually stated in his campaigns how many miles tha he wants to "secure the border" with a "wall". One can imagine the entire length of the border is implied given the level of rhetoric, and that would be a reasonable inference to draw. If he was saying this, and you asked Ann Coulter or any hard fan, "do you realize Trump only wants 500 miles of border?" what do you think their reaction would be? I should think they would believe that they had been conned.

Anyway....

Okay, let's say it's 1000 miles, and we can get very close to
that with his recent asks of congress. Estimates for that are $20b to $25b.


Given the fact that almost half of illegals are visa overstays, given the fact that illegal immigration has greatly diminished to the improved economy in Mexico, blowing 25 billion on a barrier doesnt' seem prudent when the more prudent thing to do would be to beef up existing security and work on Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala's economies and living conditions, where most border crossers are now coming from, and most are applying for asylum. (which is legal)

Besides, the promise was that Mexico would pay for it. He never mentioned he had a lay away plan.