Wake up House democrats

[What if...?]

Hey, then just have NO barriers at all. Using your logic, that should require the least manpower.

Don't need it if its $5000 a head to get caught employing an illegal with a ten percent reward.

If nobody will hire them they'll stop coming, self deport as they did after the housing crash.

 

[AlbqOwl]

They were participating in another one of these pile up a bunch of Appropriations that some proponents wants on one end of a bill and pile up a bunch of policy that other proponents want on the other end of a Bill, pass it, have everybody declare victory and run home to do a bit of fund raising. It was as most of these sorts of "Lets make a Policy for Appropriations Deal" Bills are, garbage legislation which did not pass. $46B in bundled border security appropriations on one end and Immigration policy that the dems could support on the other end. All of it watered down, sloppy and slap dashed to get it done.

Once again a Bill like this if it passes is usually garbage and if it fails you are left with one set of proponents only remembering the end of the Bill that makes their rhetorical point for them. But thanks for playing.

Which does not address the hypocrisy of Democrats who were all for border security until President Trump wanted it.

 

[Hypothetical]

It is not legal for illegal immigrants to vote in elections.

it's not legal for illegal immigrants to be in the US, but when has that ever bothered Democrats who create the sanctuaries?

 

[AlbqOwl]

to be clear, we both acknowledge that the proposal was not only to fund a wall
please clarify if i am wrong about this agreement

The argument is whether there will be funding for a wall. The Democrats who would have given Obama or Clinton any amount they wanted for a physical barrier along the border, who advocated such themselves, are now saying no money for such barrier and that is not negotiable. Hypocrites all.

 

[Hypothetical]

Has a member of your family been murdered by an illegal immigrant?

Odds are no, considering that illegals are less likely than native born American citizens to commit murder and most other crimes.

and that's a bad argument, due to the fact that until they commit a crime American citizens have every right to live in their own country whereas illegal aliens do not. why not stop as much crime as we can, from the beginning.

also EVERY illegal alien has already committed a crime, by definition.

 

[veritas1]

the wall is only part of the system of border control
show us the entirety of the system and how the 'wall' fits into that comprehensive plan
but that's the problem. there is no comprehensive plan for better border security and dealing with illegals

Maybe there'd be a comprehensive plan if both sides actually wanted to solve the problem. Democrats have shown little interest other than an occasional symbolic gesture. If lawmakers decide they want to solve it, they'll solve it. The problem is that too many of them are joined at the hip to their corporate masters or see future voters.

 

[Hypothetical]

the wall is only part of the system of border control
show us the entirety of the system and how the 'wall' fits into that comprehensive plan
but that's the problem. there is no comprehensive plan for better border security and dealing with illegals

the plan is to build a wall to stem the inflow of illegals so that a lot simply won't try to do it illegally, which hopefully makes them take a legal route inthe future, then to enforce the current laws we have to move out those who are already here illegally. yes we will need to address those born here, and amnesty, but that comes after stemming the tide.

 

[justabubba]

The argument is whether there will be funding for a wall. The Democrats who would have given Obama or Clinton any amount they wanted for a physical barrier along the border, who advocated such themselves, are now saying no money for such barrier and that is not negotiable. Hypocrites all.

they then agreed to a multifaceted plan to control our borders
that is something quite different than specific funding for an indefinite wall at an non-specific place having a questionable purpose
here's an idea; let's return to developing a comprehensive border security/immigration proposal and then evaluate whether to fund that

 

[lwf]

it's not legal for illegal immigrants to be in the US, but when has that ever bothered Democrats who create the sanctuaries?

Overstaying a visa or walking over an imaginary line in the desert doesn't require proof of citizenship. Registering to vote does.

 

[veritas1]

Including republican donors or it would have been.

What makes you think all of the forces paying our politicians to ignore employers are gonna let trump build a wall?

You had two whole years to break it off in employers of illegals.

But you want billions for trumps monument to his ego.

I have billions in my dick. Trump can suck them out.

If all the forces paying our politicians are not going to let Trump build a wall, why are you mad at Trump? Your anger is misdirected.

 

[veritas1]

You're fussing at the left.

Address the beam in YOUR eye.

The elites comprise people on both sides.

 

[justabubba]

Maybe there'd be a comprehensive plan if both sides actually wanted to solve the problem. Democrats have shown little interest other than an occasional symbolic gesture. If lawmakers decide they want to solve it, they'll solve it. The problem is that too many of them are joined at the hip to their corporate masters or see future voters.

i missed the part of your post where you noted the republicans controlled the house, senate and oval office for two years and did nothing to manage the border control/immigration issue
maybe it's because the republican donors enjoy having access to low cost labor

the only purpose the wall serves is as a vehicle to gin up the base ... the deplorables

 

[Hypothetical]

Overstaying a visa or walking over an imaginary line in the desert doesn't require proof of citizenship. Registering to vote does.

so you're saying our borders are imaginary? are ALL countries borders imaginary or just the US?

how upset would you be if we sent an army division into mexico or canada on maneuvers without asking? pretty sure they would be quite upset.


should we not defend our imaginary borders from other countries then? if they want to send troops in to Texas or michigan, let them do so?

just how imaginary are our borders in your opinion?

 

[veritas1]

2000 miles of border.

How many people per mile needed to respond to folks with ladders? Gotta be covered pretty closely, right?

At least a hundred posts with at least a dozen people each. Smugglers already misdirect, send "sacrifices" to get caught while a bunch go the other way, etc.

Repairs from damage, wear and tear, vehicles and their upkeep, drones and their upkeep, sensors and their upkeep. Thousands of guards.

Billions a year.

So, your argument is that people with ladders trying to get over a 30' wall are going to be more of a problem than ones who can simply slip through ineffectual barriers? Sorry, but that doesn't fly. The idea that the wall will encourage MORE people to try to come over is indeed an amusing one.

 

[justabubba]

the plan is to build a wall to stem the inflow of illegals so that a lot simply won't try to do it illegally, which hopefully makes them take a legal route inthe future, then to enforce the current laws we have to move out those who are already here illegally. yes we will need to address those born here, and amnesty, but that comes after stemming the tide.

why can we not stem the tide AND deal with how we are going to handle the matter of 12 million undocumented aliens living in our country

and for the record, the walls will do little to stem the tide recognizing that about half of the illegal aliens are here after overstaying their visas

 

[veritas1]

Orrin hatch tried to remove the employer sanctions from Reagan's amnesty weeks after passage.

Clean up YOUR house first.

Yea, and how many Democrats have gone after employers in the 30+ years since that happened? Neither side does it but that is still a separate issue from the wall. Employers may still want to hire illegal aliens but if they can't get here, they won't get hired.

 

[JustHanging]

It is time House democrats faced reality. The President wants the wall money. The Senate wants the wall money. The citizens of the country want the wall money.

Actually only about 1/3 of the USA is so lacking in Math skills that they think spending $5b on a wall which can be defeated by a $20 ladder is a good idea.

I think that they're also the people who thought putting solar panels on the wall was a good idea. :lamo

 

[lwf]

so you're saying our borders are imaginary? are ALL countries borders imaginary or just the US?

Borders are imaginary in that they exist as concepts rather than physical barriers. The point is: crossing a border requires nothing more than the ability to move. Voting requires proof of citizenship. Because of this, the myth that illegal immigrants come into our country and vote democrat is ludicrous.

 

[AlbqOwl]

It's easy to find all sorts of statements by Hillary, Obama, Schumer, Pelosi and others decrying illegal immigration. Now, they say if you oppose it, you're racist. No, they are frauds is more like it.

Well, to look at it absolutely intellectually honestly, they aren't saying they want illegal immigration, though they pretty much want to keep illegals who are already here and seem to favor giving refugee status to pretty much anybody who shows up at our souther border.

They, including those who would have given Presidents Carter, Clinton, and Obama any amount they proposed for a physical barrier between us an Mexico, and that includes many of them who argued publicly for such a barrier, are now saying no money for a barrier that the President wants. And now any who want such a barrier 'hate brown people' and are racist.

They are all hopeless hypocrites. You can find any number of them supporting a physical barrier over the years. One of the most glaring is "The Border Security Act. . ." that Senator Schumer himself introduced in 2006 and passed pretty much unanimously by all the Democrats. It authorized funding for a physical barrier.

In the second paragraph: "(Sec. 3) Prohibits the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) (Secretary) from processing applications for registered provisional immigrant status (RPI), as established by this Act, until the Secretary has submitted to Congress the notice of commencement of implementation of the Comprehensive Southern Border Security Strategy and the Southern Border Fencing Strategy."
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/744

 

[Hypothetical]

why can we not stem the tide AND deal with how we are going to handle the matter of 12 million undocumented aliens living in our country

and for the record, the walls will do little to stem the tide recognizing that about half of the illegal aliens are here after overstaying their visas

because that issue is going to have a huge partisan problem at first and get nothing done. we want something done first to stem the tide.
2nd part, if we are policing the overstayed visas properly in the first place, then the wall will work to dissuade them from coming in after they are deported, as well as first time gate crashers.

whats so hard about expecting visitors to our country to follow the laws we prescribe?

 

[veritas1]

i missed the part of your post where you noted the republicans controlled the house, senate and oval office for two years and did nothing to manage the border control/immigration issue
maybe it's because the republican donors enjoy having access to low cost labor

the only purpose the wall serves is as a vehicle to gin up the base ... the deplorables

Yes, you have missed my numerous posts in multiple threads pointing out the spineless GOP House of the last two years.

 

[veritas1]

why can we not stem the tide AND deal with how we are going to handle the matter of 12 million undocumented aliens living in our country

and for the record, the walls will do little to stem the tide recognizing that about half of the illegal aliens are here after overstaying their visas

The fact that we neither build a serious wall nor punish employers nor go after visa overstays shows that the people who could pass and/or enforce such laws, are not interested in stopping illegal immigration. Trump is about the only person trying to do anything yet the left hates him for it. You can either hate Trump on this issue or oppose illegal immigration. You can't do both.

 

[AlbqOwl]

they then agreed to a multifaceted plan to control our borders
that is something quite different than specific funding for an indefinite wall at an non-specific place having a questionable purpose
here's an idea; let's return to developing a comprehensive border security/immigration proposal and then evaluate whether to fund that

President Trump has not dismissed or ruled out ANY methods used for defending our southern border. But he pledged, among other things, a physical barrier to help prevent those who thumb their noses at our laws from entering the country at will. He has also proposed a lot of other very necessary provisions that the Democrats, including those who once supported such provisions including a physical barrier, now declare racist and mean.

Posted a few minutes ago but worth noting is Senator Schumer's own bill in 2006, supported pretty much unanimously by all the Democrats, in the second paraghraph stated: "(Sec. 3) Prohibits the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) (Secretary) from processing applications for registered provisional immigrant status (RPI), as established by this Act, until the Secretary has submitted to Congress the notice of commencement of implementation of the Comprehensive Southern Border Security Strategy and the Southern Border Fencing Strategy
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/744

He is a super hypocrite. They all are.

 

[veritas1]

Well, to look at it absolutely intellectually honestly, they aren't saying they want illegal immigration, though they pretty much want to keep illegals who are already here and seem to favor giving refugee status to pretty much anybody who shows up at our souther border.

They, including those who would have given Presidents Carter, Clinton, and Obama any amount they proposed for a physical barrier between us an Mexico, and that includes many of them who argued publicly for such a barrier, are now saying no money for a barrier that the President wants. And now any who want such a barrier 'hate brown people' and are racist.

They are all hopeless hypocrites. You can find any number of them supporting a physical barrier over the years. One of the most glaring is "The Border Security Act. . ." that Senator Schumer himself introduced in 2006 and passed pretty much unanimously by all the Democrats. It authorized funding for a physical barrier.

In the second paragraph: "(Sec. 3) Prohibits the Secretary of Homeland Security (DHS) (Secretary) from processing applications for registered provisional immigrant status (RPI), as established by this Act, until the Secretary has submitted to Congress the notice of commencement of implementation of the Comprehensive Southern Border Security Strategy and the Southern Border Fencing Strategy."
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/744

If Trump had offered up such language, we'd hear endless bleatings of "Hitler" and "fascist". There is hardly any hypocrisy which can surpass that of the current Dem leadership on the illegal immigration issue.

 

[AlbqOwl]

The fact that we neither build a serious wall nor punish employers nor go after visa overstays shows that the people who could pass and/or enforce such laws, are not interested in stopping illegal immigration. Trump is about the only person trying to do anything yet the left hates him for it. You can either hate Trump on this issue or oppose illegal immigration. You can't do both.

This I agree with 100%. Those who thought a physical barrier and immigration reform was great when the Democrats including Presidents Carter, Clinton, Obama supported it, are now declaring it racist and mean. Hypocrites all.

Those who honestly believe in immigration policy and control simply cannot oppose a tiny pittance from the federal budget toward that end. To oppose it just because President Trump wants it is the worst form of partisanship and ideological fanaticism. All intellectually honest and/or rational people know that.