Texas governor to defy DOJ request to remove floating barriers in Rio Grande: ‘Texas will see you in court, Mr. President’

[Ambig]

oh gawd no, Democrats will NEVER go for a barrier

they want this flood of illegals - WHY is another subject

Well, I'm curious. Why do Dems want a flood of illegals?

I thought it was the fatcat Pubs bringing them in, to keep their grounds in order.

Why do Dems want illegals flooding in?

 

[Ambig]

those two things would help - but Democrats would NEVER go for it

they want their lawns mowed cheap, their houses cleaned cheap and fruits/veggies cheap ... gotts have that unskilled, uneducated, slave-type labor

Wait. You're saying that Dems are the fatcat industrialists?

When did this happen?

 

[hecatmoggie]

Ah, see now we cross purposes. CNN did an exposé in the 2000s where they discussed farmers who needed their produce picked from trees, etc. - they said that no American had ever even applied for the job. So, even if we did ban illegal immigration while keeping work permits, etc. active -- there will still be a shortage of that "unskilled, uneducated, slave-type labor" that is essential to the agricultural economy. I think the problem that we're facing is that no politician on either side has ever thought, "…and then what?"

In other words, deprive the agricultural sector of their cheap labor, …and then what? There seems to be no contingency plan, and that is where we, as a society, get ourselves into trouble. If you approached it backwards from the result, designed a plan for agricultural America, got enough people to signed off on it and put it into law, THEN we might actually have a real debate on illegal immigration. But until the back end problems are solved, it makes no sense to solve the front end.

my Dad was a migrant worker

but yeah so ya'll want that cheap illegal slave labor, kids being drug 1,000 miles through drugs, sex slavery, human trafficking ... the dirt, starving, unsanitary conditions, all the diseases ....

but dang it, we can have $1.59 head of lettuce ITS WORTH IT !!!

 

[hecatmoggie]

Well, I'm curious. Why do Dems want a flood of illegals?

I thought it was the fatcat Pubs bringing them in, to keep their grounds in order.

Why do Dems want illegals flooding in?

my best guess ?

the next Democrat president will do an amnesty and give 15-20 million people citizenship

and with that, comes 15-20 million thankful new voters

If Trump wins in 2024, the GOP really needs to do Reagan 2.0 and capture all those votes ... literally remind all those people every year who helped them



that and $1.59 lettuce and cheap yard mowers and house cleaners

 

[Simon W. Moon]

my best guess ?
the next Democrat president will do an amnesty and give 15-20 million people citizenship
and with that, comes 15-20 million thankful new voters
If Trump wins in 2024, the GOP really needs to do Reagan 2.0 and capture all those votes ... literally remind all those people every year who helped them
that and $1.59 lettuce and cheap yard mowers and house cleaners

I thought the Demonrats were trying to bankrupt Americans, American farmers, and pay everyone $27/hr to screw the Capitalists?

Why are they working for policies which will benefit the exact same American farmers they are trying to destroy?

I am almost beginning to start suspect some of these conspiracy theories are whacked and a bit tetched

 

[Simon W. Moon]

the next Democrat president will do an amnesty and give 15-20 million people citizenship

If this fails to happen,
will you change anything about how you think about the world?

 

[Luce]

my Dad was a migrant worker

Doubt.

 

[Paradoxical]

my best guess ?

the next Democrat president will do an amnesty and give 15-20 million people citizenship

and with that, comes 15-20 million thankful new voters

If Trump wins in 2024, the GOP really needs to do Reagan 2.0 and capture all those votes ... literally remind all those people every year who helped them



that and $1.59 lettuce and cheap yard mowers and house cleaners

The democrats don't even deny this anymore. Ask Chuickie Schumer.

 

[Ambig]

my best guess ?

the next Democrat president will do an amnesty and give 15-20 million people citizenship

and with that, comes 15-20 million thankful new voters

If Trump wins in 2024, the GOP really needs to do Reagan 2.0 and capture all those votes ... literally remind all those people every year who helped them



that and $1.59 lettuce and cheap yard mowers and house cleaners

So you want the Pubs to buy their votes, because you're worried that the Dems might buy their votes?

Well, then why don't the Pubs invite another 20M of them into the country?

 

[BlueTex]

The failure to give our states protection against an invasion is a direct violation of the Guarantee Clause at Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution.

The Federal Government’s Guarantee to Protect the States Against Invasion | The Center for Renewing America

The federal government has willfully abandoned its duty to defend the states – and the citizens who reside within them – from the ongoing invasion. However, states possess the authority, right now, to remedy Washington’s abrogation of its Guarantee Clause obligations.

americarenewing.com

Which sovereign nation is invading Texas?

 

[hecatmoggie]

If this fails to happen,
will you change anything about how you think about the world?

just means I'm a wrong on the WHY behind wanting to have millions of non-citizens flooding into the USA

why do you think they fight hard to keep this going ?

 

[hecatmoggie]

So you want the Pubs to buy their votes, because you're worried that the Dems might buy their votes?

Well, then why don't the Pubs invite another 20M of them into the country?

because its illegal ?

 

[Absentglare]

Been there, done that:

In Texas, Senators Vote To Finally Fix The State’s Electric Grid

In a bipartisan, veto-proof vote, Texas senators approved a bill this week designed to finally fix a chronic issue on the state power grid that has lingered unaddressed for over a decade.

www.forbes.com

Ah, yes, the “private” energy grid. The taxpayers fund it and the CEO’s profits both!

 

[Simon W. Moon]

just means I'm a wrong on the WHY behind wanting to have millions of non-citizens flooding into the USA

why do you think they fight hard to keep this going ?

I think you're confused about the facts.
So, there's not really an answer to your question about the things you're assuming cause I don't share your assumptions.

I do note that the GOP controlled the House, the Senate and the Presidency for Trump's first two years in office.
With a GOP House, a GOP Senate, and a GOP President, the GOP was clear and free to deal with "the border issue" as they saw fit.

What did the GOP do about the border when they controlled both Houses of Congress and the Presidency?
Does what they did reveal anything about their priorities?

 

[Ambig]

just means I'm a wrong on the WHY behind wanting to have millions of non-citizens flooding into the USA

why do you think they fight hard to keep this going ?

Has it ever occurred to you that no one is fighting hard to keep this going?

That maybe you've been convinced of that by the rightwing bubblesphere?

 

[Ambig]

because its illegal ?

The Pubs are worried about doing something illegal?

Not that I've noticed. Did you see all those barriers in the river?

 

[nota bene]

All of the things I listed are factual.

Which one are you having a problem with?

All three. Your entire statement, in fact: "Abbott just hates the US constitution in the same way he hates women, children, and reading."

 

[dncc]

My guess is to avoid going back and forth on this, wasting money and time. A ruling would mean Abbott can't just keep putting it back.

No such ruling would be passed. It would be like me putting a toll booth on the public sidewalk outside of my house. I don't own the sidewalk.

 

[dncc]

I can't see that Biden has had a damn thing to do with this process.

Well, you should try opening your eyes or perhaps pick up a copy of the US Constitution between what I imagine are hour long bong rips.

 

[ClaraD]

I am not for the floating barriers in Texas. What I would be for would be to fence off areas on both the Mexican and the American side of the border where it it's very dangerous and people have drowned, etc. (Or at the very least put signs in those areas warning of the danger and cautioning those crossing to "proceed at their own risk"). The floating barrier does not solve the problem in a way that will not lead to more deaths.

you cannot force Mexico to fence off anything and we cannot go on foreign land and fence it of either.

 

[ClaraD]

my Dad was a migrant worker

but yeah so ya'll want that cheap illegal slave labor, kids being drug 1,000 miles through drugs, sex slavery, human trafficking ... the dirt, starving, unsanitary conditions, all the diseases ....

but dang it, we can have $1.59 head of lettuce ITS WORTH IT !!!

you do realize that the lawmakers in Florida are being made fun of for their charade right? They went and passed a law...and didn't think about all of the Republicans that use people who aren't legal...especially in their construction and ag industry...(just agriculture is over 7 billion dollars) and they essentially said 'April fools folks....we were just kidding)

 

[ClaraD]

Strictly as an academic exercise:

Article I, Section 10, under powers denied to the States:

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay."

I believe some have argued this as a basis.

Also, Article 4, Section 7 of the Texas Consitution: Sec. 7. GOVERNOR AS COMMANDER‑IN‑CHIEF OF MILITARY FORCES. Heshall be Commander‑in‑Chief of the military forces of the State, except when theyare called into actual service of the United States. He shall have power to call forth the militia to execute the laws of the State, to suppress insurrections, and to repel invasions.

On the other hand, where in the Constitution does it give the US the authority to control borders. Commerce regulation is permitted, rules of Naturalization is permitted, but not actual physical control of the border.

None of this means that what Abbott is doing is reasonable, but when there are arguments to be had that there are things that Abbott can do.

Congress hall have power …

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, … (Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 4)

Abbott has no authority to determine who can come and who cannot...nor how that is regulated.
And
The United States Constitution provides that the president "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur" (Article II, section 2). Treaties are binding agreements between nations and become part of international law.

 

[PoliSciPulse]

you cannot force Mexico to fence off anything and we cannot go on foreign land and fence it of either.

Neither of which I was suggesting.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

Congress hall have power …

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, … (Article 1, Section 8, paragraph 4)

Abbott has no authority to determine who can come and who cannot...nor how that is regulated.
And
The United States Constitution provides that the president "shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur" (Article II, section 2). Treaties are binding agreements between nations and become part of international law.

Rules for becoming a citizen has no mention of controlling borders; doesnt even mention the word.

A Treaty cannot give the US government authority to a power not in the constitution—controlling borders. Nearly all the treaties between US and Mexico address either the border location and/or commerce. Which while impacting Texas, does not preclude Texas from having a border with Mexico.

 

[BlueTex]

Rules for becoming a citizen has no mention of controlling borders; doesnt even mention the word.

A Treaty cannot give the US government authority to a power not in the constitution—controlling borders. Nearly all the treaties between US and Mexico address either the border location and/or commerce. Which while impacting Texas, does not preclude Texas from having a border with Mexico.

We do have a treaty with Mexico that prohibits construction in the Rio Grande. It’s quite specific and was signed by a republican…