Armed Polite Society

Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Hawkmoon on September 04, 2017, 02:22:58 PM

Title: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 04, 2017, 02:22:58 PM
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/03/trump-dreamers-immigration-daca-immigrants-242301

It appears that President Trump is going to pull the plug on DACA -- with a 6-month delay to allow those illegals who want to scram, time to scram, and to allow Congress to do something if they're really worried about it.

IMHO this is the only proper course. Obama had no legal authority to order that immigration laws be ignored in the first place, so if Trump does pull the plug on DACA he's only reversing another of Obama;s unconstitutional policies/orders. The Congress writes the laws -- if they want to change the laws to allow illegals to remain here -- and work, and/or suck off the government teat -- they are the ones who should enact legislation to make that happen. This, of course, puts them right where they don't want to be -- they don't want to be forced to appear weak on border security and immigration, but they also don't want to antagonize (dare I say "alienate"?) the growing Hispanic "constituency" (if a heap of people who aren't here legally and aren't supposed to vote can be considered a "constituency").

If he does it, it's a ballsy move by Trump, because it's going to piss off Congress even more, but it's going to force a lot of them to show their true colors.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: makattak on September 04, 2017, 02:27:49 PM
More and more, it's clear that the true colors of everyone in D.C. is green.

They've all been paid for by the Chamber of Commerce.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: 230RN on September 04, 2017, 03:10:59 PM
I think it's part of "building a wall," which I think too many took literally as a physical wall.

If you can't keep 'em out, chase 'em out.

Terry, strong proponent of legal (and strongly vetted) immigration, 230RN
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Mannlicher on September 04, 2017, 03:26:27 PM
DACA was a mistake when it was formulated.  It is unconstitutional on the face of it.  Trump at least, is trying to put the interests of AMERICANS first,  not the interests of everyone else in the world.  Sad, sort of, that folks live in third world shitholes, but we can't fix it for everyone, and should not try.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 04, 2017, 03:43:51 PM
DACA was a mistake when it was formulated.  It is unconstitutional on the face of it.  Trump at least, is trying to put the interests of AMERICANS first,  not the interests of everyone else in the world.  Sad, sort of, that folks live in third world shitholes, but we can't fix it for everyone, and should not try.


Agreed. They should stay and fix their shitholes, instead of coming here and immediately doing their best to downgrade the U.S. to shithole conditions rivaling those they left behind.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: HankB on September 05, 2017, 09:08:16 AM
Agreed. They should stay and fix their shitholes, instead of coming here and immediately doing their best to downgrade the U.S. to shithole conditions rivaling those they left behind.
Agreed - and I can say much the same to those ^%$#@! Kalifornians who are fleeing to Texas!
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: BobR on September 05, 2017, 10:40:22 AM
Agreed - and I can say much the same to those ^%$#@! Kalifornians who are fleeing to Texas!

Speaking of those Calexit guys, here is a 10 minute video of Tucker Carlson talking to one of the proponents of moving the middle class out of California and exporting their values to the rest of the US.  ;/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ikxreo413YE

If you don't want to watch the whole thing to prevent the loss of brain cells start around the 6 minute mark.  ;)

bob
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 05, 2017, 12:08:09 PM
Trump and Sessions did it: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TRUMP_IMMIGRATION_THE_LATEST?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-09-05-11-20-13

Predictably, Nancy Pelosi calls it an act of political cowardice. Personally, I calls it an act of political courage. It's always easy to roll over and give away the law -- it takes courage to stand up for what's legal even when there are lots of people who want the illegality to continue.

And ... what's this? Putting Americans to work, because there aren't enough foreigners? Who'd a thunk it?

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/04/summer-employers-trump-guest-worker-visas-immigration-242271

It has to be fake news, of course, because everyone knows the foreigners only do the work that Americans are unwilling to do.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Pb on September 05, 2017, 12:36:05 PM
Awesome Trump!   =D
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: grampster on September 05, 2017, 09:31:11 PM
Aaaaand the whiners and morons are coming out of the woodwork.  America sure is different now than when I was a kid.  We were actually taught correct stuff in general and what America really was.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: just Warren on September 05, 2017, 09:50:52 PM
Would you trade residency for the DACA people if it meant we got the wall?

Trump holds them hostage in a way but will let them stay as long as the wall is built.

Work stops on the wall and DACA people start being deported.

What about if Trump can get an absolutely free hand in dealing with other illegals?

How about an end to birthright citizenship if the parents are illegal?

I ask because DACA types are the least problematic of the illegal population and if meant we got the other things it would be worth it to let them stay. They are the most acculturated, speak the language, have good jobs generally, and are not a big source of violent crime so it's not like they are a big risk.

They can still be deported if they commit crimes of course, and they must be ineligible for benefits and have to put themselves on a path to citizenship or find themselves deported in a few years.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 05, 2017, 10:27:55 PM

How about an end to birthright citizenship if the parents are illegal?


We need that, but I don't think we should be "negotiating" for it. We should just do it.



I ask because DACA types are the least problematic of the illegal population and if meant we got the other things it would be worth it to let them stay. They are the most acculturated, speak the language, have good jobs generally, and are not a big source of violent crime so it's not like they are a big risk.


They're the tip of the iceberg -- or the tip of the spear. The protesters are already whining about "breaking up families," and the only way to avoid breaking up a family when some of the members (or all of the members) are illegal is to either deport them all, or let them all stay. So what happens if we allow the "dreamers" to remain? Do we then have to allow the also-illegal alien parents to remain, in the holy name of not breaking up the family? Do the dreamers become de facto] anchor babies?

The problem is that, individually, many (maybe even most) of them are nice people, and each has his or her own story. Collectively, however, they are a problem ... and they are here illegally. What we're seeing is the unfortunate result of years of NOT enforcing the laws. The lack of enforcement encouraged waves of illegals to come here, and now that someone has balls enough to suggest actually enforcing the law, everyone is accusing him of being a monster. Sorry, but no. The true monsters - the people who should bear the brunt of the criticism and the blame -- are the [bleeping] liberals who allowed this mess to get so out of control from the git-go.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: zahc on September 05, 2017, 10:34:54 PM
isn't the birthright thing written into the Constitution?
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: TommyGunn on September 05, 2017, 11:12:37 PM
isn't the birthright thing written into the Constitution?

For those born in America, yes,  it's in the 14th amendment.  These daca were born in another country and brought here as young children.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Scout26 on September 05, 2017, 11:35:05 PM
isn't the birthright thing written into the Constitution?

Not exactly.   Many countries do offer birthright citizenship (Germany, for example).  However, that does not confer onto the parents the right to remain.  In fact Germany used to kick out non-native parents and their German-born children.  Now, when the child was 18, they became subject to German National Service (either in the military or alternative service), unless the child renounced and revoked their German Citizenship (or was serving in the military of a friendly foreign power, like the US or British military.)  

Many children born to US servicemember parents, had to have their parents jump through hoops to get US citizenship shortly after birth.  

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/18/constitution-doesnt-mandate-birthright-citizenship/

http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/27/the-constitution-still-doesnt-grant-birthright-citizenship/
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Firethorn on September 05, 2017, 11:37:34 PM
Which occasionally leads to the problem of us deporting the high school valedictorian, who has a scholarship to Harvard, who doesn't even speak his 'native' country's language because the parents were like 'he is going to be American'.

If they're criminal, get rid of them.  But the good ones?  Those we should keep.  Deport the parents when the kid is an adult and doesn't need them anymore.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: 41magsnub on September 06, 2017, 12:14:04 AM
Listening to pbs in the  back of an uber.  They are interviewing a paramedic in Houston who sounds American but is an illegal brought in as a baby.  Irritating they are trying to tie this to the storm...
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Scout26 on September 06, 2017, 02:01:00 AM
Which occasionally leads to the problem of us deporting the high school valedictorian, who has a scholarship to Harvard, who doesn't even speak his 'native' country's language because the parents were like 'he is going to be American'.

If they're criminal, get rid of them.  But the good ones?  Those we should keep.  Deport the parents when the kid is an adult and doesn't need them anymore.

So if someone does something illegal, does that make it "criminal"??   Yes, it sucks for the kid.  However, the parents failed to consider that outcome.  Life is hard, it's harder when your (parents) are stupid.  Go to you parents home country, do not pass go, do not collect $200.   When you are 18 you can come back, or if you have legal family here (not foster care, that system is already grossly overloaded), you can stay.  But no .gov bennies. 
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 06, 2017, 06:51:12 AM
isn't the birthright thing written into the Constitution?

The American-born children of illegal alien parents are what are referred to as "anchor babies." They're different from "dreamers." The dreamers are illegals who were brought here as infants or young children, but who are not native-born Americans. You have to watch closely, because the leftists and the liberals try to obfuscate the distinction.

Why "anchor babies"? Because the liberals use them as an argument to allow the illegal parents to stay here, thus "anchoring" the parents to the U.S.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: makattak on September 06, 2017, 08:33:46 AM
Which occasionally leads to the problem of us deporting the high school valedictorian, who has a scholarship to Harvard, who doesn't even speak his 'native' country's language because the parents were like 'he is going to be American'.

If they're criminal, get rid of them.  But the good ones?  Those we should keep.  Deport the parents when the kid is an adult and doesn't need them anymore.

Ah yes. Let's ignore second-order effects because everything is happy-happy joy joy for the "good" illegals!

First of all, if he qualified for Harvard, then let him apply for a student visa. We have laws for how this works.

Secondly, rewarding his parents with U.S. citizenship (which is what "chain migration" will do) for breaking the law will certainly not encourage others to similarly break the law.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 06, 2017, 03:04:32 PM
Ah yes. Let's ignore second-order effects because everything is happy-happy joy joy for the "good" illegals!

First of all, if he qualified for Harvard, then let him apply for a student visa. We have laws for how this works.

Secondly, rewarding his parents with U.S. citizenship (which is what "chain migration" will do) for breaking the law will certainly not encourage others to similarly break the law.

Yepp. Today's anchor baby will be tomorrow's anchor Harvard Ph.D.

We either have laws, or we don't If we have laws, they should be enforced, uniformly and objectively. Laws that are not enforced, or are enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, are worse than no laws at all, because they engender an attitude of disrespect for the rule of law.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Scout26 on September 06, 2017, 05:51:15 PM
Which occasionally leads to the problem of us deporting the high school valedictorian, who has a scholarship to Harvard, who doesn't even speak his 'native' country's language because the parents were like 'he is going to be American'.

If they're criminal, get rid of them.  But the good ones?  Those we should keep.  Deport the parents when the kid is an adult and doesn't need them anymore.

Again "occasionally", and sometimes they are high screwl valedictorian because the screwl administrators want to highlight how bad those evil republicans are in wanting to break-up and deport entire families of our "Best and Brightest". 

And for every high screwl valedictorian; there are hundreds, nee thousands, of "bad kids" in gangs, selling drugs, and committing other crimes.

Plus we pay for most of them.  EIC on the income tax; along with food stamps, various welfare, housing and other fed.gov bennies that they or their parents can apply for.  If your living rent free, eating for free, getting a welfare check, and huge .gov refund each spring, you can afford, to send your under the counter paycheck back to Mexico...

Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Ben on September 06, 2017, 06:19:09 PM
So this Antonio Vargas guy is shooting his mouth off again, and also bragging about his doctored SSI card.

He apparently was bragging about it before, in 2014, which begs the question, why wasn't he arrested? I'm not sure if it's a felony or not (the twitchy article says it is, and should be right as its at the very least identity theft), but shouldn't this mean I can rob a bank and get off scot free? After all, I'd just be taking other people's money too.

https://twitchy.com/brettt-3136/2017/09/06/flashback-illegal-immigrant-shows-off-doctored-social-security-card-hes-used-to-pay-thousands-in-taxes/

Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 07, 2017, 12:48:17 PM
Apparently Bannon (who is, himself, a Roman Catholic) has raised a point: the Roman Catholic Church has a conflict of interest in criticizing Trump and in supporting DACA. Bannon points out that the RC church needs immigrants (legal or illegal) to fill the pews.

http://www.newser.com/story/248313/bannon-catholic-church-needs-illegal-aliens-to-fill-pews.html

I hadn't thought of that, but I have to agree. When my wife was alive we alternated between attending an Episcopal church (both because I'm a Protestant and because she liked the Latino assistant pastor) and a nearby Roman Catholic church (because my late wife, being a Latina from South America) was Roman Catholic. At the Episcopal church, we attended a Spanish language mass. I would estimate that probably two thirs of the attendees were illegals. At the Catholic church, that part of the city had changed so much demographically that the name on the church had been changed, officially, to the Spanish version. When I was young it was Sacred Heart. Now it's Sagrado Corazon. And, without guessing at a percentage, I'll just say that I'm certain a significant portion of the congregation was (and is) comprised of illegals.

There was a time when I used to take in old computers and fix them up for use by kids who couldn't afford to buy a computer but who needed one for school. I did a couple for the Episcopal church, through the Latino pastor, but I stopped doing it because I became certain that he was channeling them to illegals. And, as I explained to my wife, I obviously had no prejudice against Latinos but I very much object to ILLEGAL Latinos (as well as illegal Somalis, Arabs, Russians, Chinese, or Martians). We went through the process to bring my wife here legally -- I have zero sympathy for those who skip the process and sneak in.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: wmenorr67 on September 07, 2017, 01:32:20 PM
Church I used to attend has changed from Trinity United Methodist Church to Trinity Community Church: A United Methodist Congregation.  I would say that most of the congregation is now Hispanic and most of them not here legally.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: grampster on September 07, 2017, 02:23:01 PM
Try telling a Democrat of the leftist/liberal persuasion that nullifying DACA, securing our borders and deporting (at least)the IAs who are felons or have committed high misdemeanors because doing so is NOT a question of morality or human rights, but one of the rule of law upon which our country was founded and has thrived.   The irony, you will discover, is that those who would proclaim that the government should be in charge of, well, just about everything, will swallow their tongues over the notion that the government should secure the border, have some reasonable immigration laws including deportation.

I have no problem with those young people who were brought here by parents illegally being singled out by a law passed by congress that seeks to ameliorate the problem with that particular class of illegal immigrant with some reasonable expectations that they would have to fulfill.

After our borders have been secured as much as possible, I am not opposed to having any illegal who has a job, a place to live, not on welfare, not been convicted of a felony or high misdemeanor to come forward and be granted residency with a pathway to citizenship that requires learning English, swearing allegiance to the USA and participating in some reasonable way in community service for a reasonable period of time.  You support La Raza?  Get the hell out.


National sovereignty is not about human rights or morality, it's about having a rule of law that serve the interest of the country and its citizenry.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 07, 2017, 02:54:55 PM
I saw this, in response to Bible passages that are supposedly pro-DACA:

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthefederalist.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F09%2FScreen-Shot-2017-09-05-at-11.02.36-PM-470x241.png&hash=236123b1eaf8cf78818989830db2a4a0a1eb5535)

http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/07/believing-in-national-sovereignty-doesnt-make-you-a-bad-christian/
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: makattak on September 07, 2017, 04:16:51 PM
I saw this, in response to Bible passages that are supposedly pro-DACA:

(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fthefederalist.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2017%2F09%2FScreen-Shot-2017-09-05-at-11.02.36-PM-470x241.png&hash=236123b1eaf8cf78818989830db2a4a0a1eb5535)

http://thefederalist.com/2017/09/07/believing-in-national-sovereignty-doesnt-make-you-a-bad-christian/

From the article:

Quote
Generally speaking, countries tend not to reward illegal immigrants with citizenship, particularly if they hope to send a message to inhabitants of the region that rule of law is important or that further illegal immigration is undesirable. If attachment based on land, laws, and institutions are derided, other attachments become stronger, including those based on race and religion. Without strong adherence to the rule of law, these non-national attachments can lead to strife and violence within a country.

I had never considered this previously. That is a very interesting point to make that the breakdown of the rule of law may result in greater tribalism.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: grampster on September 07, 2017, 05:00:51 PM
From the article:

I had never considered this previously. That is a very interesting point to make that the breakdown of the rule of law may result in greater tribalism.


Just look what's going on in our country right now.  Tribalism is the net result of the divide and conquer aspect of leftism.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: sanglant on September 08, 2017, 09:42:28 AM
http://video.gq.com/watch/the-closer-with-keith-olbermann-drumpf-s-daca-decision-is-a-grim-turning-point

is it just me, or was that threatening black trump supporters with the klan? :facepalm:
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Ben on September 08, 2017, 04:13:15 PM
Ah, the irony never ends. UC regents are suing DHS over DACA, citing "lack of due process". Same university system is joining others in their outrage over the dept of education nixing parts of Obama's Title IX, which pretty much threw out due process at the university level in favor of student kangaroo courts.

https://twitchy.com/dougp-3137/2017/09/08/ex-homeland-security-director-backs-daca-lawsuit-against-trump-admin/
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: just Warren on September 08, 2017, 07:22:09 PM
Here's a new wrinkle: 40%+ of DACAns are frauds. (https://www.nationaleconomicseditorial.com/2017/09/08/50-percent-daca-recipients-fraudulent-says-former-immigration-official/)

Could be as high as 50% and could even be higher than that says a former fed investigator.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Pb on September 09, 2017, 11:27:51 AM
How strange that Trump is a lying, narssastic philandering ahole and he's still the best president I can remember.  And I didn't even vote for him!  The bar for presidential performance is so low, anything good he does is a wonderful surprise.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Mannlicher on September 09, 2017, 04:49:03 PM
DACA was unconstitutional when they passed it.  It was a ploy by barack hussein to flood America with illegals.  They are not wanted, not needed, and should be returned to sender.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: just Warren on September 13, 2017, 11:30:45 PM
Looks like Trump traded DACA for some other things. (http://time.com/4940903/trump-daca-program-protections/)

I'm not optimistic that he's going to get anything close to worth it on this deal.

Quote
"We agreed to enshrine the protections of DACA into law quickly, and to work out a package of border security, excluding the wall, that's acceptable to both sides," Pelosi and Schumer said in a joint statement.

"But given that we're evil weasels we will do everything possible to not follow through on this deal. So we're going to get everything we want and not give up anything." They said, chuckling evilly, as they went back into their underrock lair.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 14, 2017, 07:06:17 AM
I read that some Republicans will be unhappy. :duh:

I think it's time to start writing to Republican congresscritters to remind them that they brought this on themselves. The Republicans control both houses of Congress. If they won't do what the People elected Trump to accomplish, then why should he pay any attention to them? I prefer to think of this as a warning shot over the Republicans' bow -- straighten up and fly the mission, or become [even more] irrelevant.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: makattak on September 14, 2017, 08:17:32 AM
I read that some Republicans will be unhappy. :duh:

I think it's time to start writing to Republican congresscritters to remind them that they brought this on themselves. The Republicans control both houses of Congress. If they won't do what the People elected Trump to accomplish, then why should he pay any attention to them? I prefer to think of this as a warning shot over the Republicans' bow -- straighten up and fly the mission, or become [even more] irrelevant.

Why would this be a warning shot? This is exactly what their masters want, and now they don't have to take the blame for it.

It's a gift to them.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: makattak on September 14, 2017, 09:38:25 AM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/09/14/trump-says-no-deal-reached-dems-over-dreamers-border-wall/665109001/

"The wall will come later"

No, Mr. President, it won't. We've been sold this bill of goods OVER AND OVER. The Democrats and the weasel Republicans will get what they want and then continue to block the wall. This is simply a betrayal of the biggest reason you were elected.

Your caving will ensure a "President-elect Elizabeth Warren" in November of 2020. Congratulations, Madame President.  
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Ben on September 14, 2017, 10:45:11 AM
Your caving will ensure a "President-elect Elizabeth Warren Kamala Harris" in November of 2020. Congratulations, Madame President.  


FTFY.

I think if you don't live on the liberal elite coasts you may not see just how much of a push there is to make her the female Obama. She's a vapid airhead, but also everything that Obama, Hillary, and Bernie/Warren/etc lovers want, all rolled into one, and she already has tons of money rolling in. About the only people on that side that don't want her running are the old time establishment dems, like Feinstein.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: makattak on September 14, 2017, 11:15:46 AM
FTFY.

I think if you don't live on the liberal elite coasts you may not see just how much of a push there is to make her the female Obama. She's a vapid airhead, but also everything that Obama, Hillary, and Bernie/Warren/etc lovers want, all rolled into one, and she already has tons of money rolling in. About the only people on that side that don't want her running are the old time establishment dems, like Feinstein.

She's even worse than Elizabeth Warren. Of course she'll win.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: TechMan on September 14, 2017, 11:48:12 AM
Fitting:  https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/09/14/brit-humes-tweet-from-2016-explains-todays-daca-debate/ (https://twitchy.com/gregp-3534/2017/09/14/brit-humes-tweet-from-2016-explains-todays-daca-debate/)
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Pb on September 14, 2017, 11:59:29 AM
Yeah, well if he ends up supporting / signing DACA I will go back to hating him again.

 :mad:
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Ben on September 14, 2017, 12:09:43 PM
Yeah, well if he ends up supporting / signing DACA I will go back to hating him again.

 :mad:

Yeah, you know, I want to give him benefit of the doubt, mostly because of what the GOPe has been doing. While I have no problems with him doing workarounds to that obstruction, I have a big problem if he just decides to go for spite and simply starts backing the dem agenda.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 14, 2017, 12:25:13 PM
FTFY.

I think if you don't live on the liberal elite coasts you may not see just how much of a push there is to make her the female Obama. She's a vapid airhead, but also everything that Obama, Hillary, and Bernie/Warren/etc lovers want, all rolled into one, and she already has tons of money rolling in. About the only people on that side that don't want her running are the old time establishment dems, like Feinstein.


http://www.dailywire.com/news/21057/new-poll-bernie-sanders-way-ahead-democratic-2020-tyler-dahnke

Quote
Of the respondents, 28% chose the millionaire socialist Sanders as their preferred candidate. Joe Biden, who came in second behind Sanders, finished with only 17%, while intersectional favorite, Kamala Harris, earned a measly 6%.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Ben on September 14, 2017, 01:18:51 PM
Obama was a nobody with no chance either. We'll likely have to wait till around 2019 either way to see what shakes out. Personally, I think Sanders will end up being too old.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 14, 2017, 02:46:06 PM
Sanders is already too old. Regardless of who their chosen candidate is in 2020, the Democrats won't allow Sanders to run again as a Democrat.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: RoadKingLarry on September 14, 2017, 02:53:24 PM
I suspect it will be some combination of Harris/Warren.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 19, 2017, 01:11:33 AM
I have had a change of heart on DACA. I propose that every citizen found guilty of Antifa/Black Lives Matter violence or vandalism should have the blessing of exchanging their American citizenship for the nationality of a promising young "Dreamer." Said "Dreamer" shall immediately enjoy full citizenship, and said American (now ex-American) hooligan shall be deported.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Hawkmoon on September 19, 2017, 06:42:59 AM
I have had a change of heart on DACA. I propose that every citizen found guilty of Antifa/Black Lives Matter violence or vandalism should have the blessing of exchanging their American citizenship for the nationality of a promising young "Dreamer." Said "Dreamer" shall immediately enjoy full citizenship, and said American (now ex-American) hooligan shall be deported.

I be down wit dat.


On another note, I see that there are some in the [illegal] immigrant community who aren't in favor of legalizing DACA. Instead, they won't be satisfied unless all 11 million illegals are given blanket amnesty.

Sheesh.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Ben on September 19, 2017, 10:06:57 AM
I be down wit dat.


On another note, I see that there are some in the [illegal] immigrant community who aren't in favor of legalizing DACA. Instead, they won't be satisfied unless all 11 million illegals are given blanket amnesty.

Sheesh.

They apparently shouted down Pelosi yesterday and completely rattled her. She cut her press conference or whatever it was short and left.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/18/protesters-call-out-pelosi-over-trump-daca-deal.html
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: K Frame on September 19, 2017, 10:12:16 AM
My Rep., Gerry Connolly, is on his facebook pulpit this morning bitching about how Trump is creating a huge mess because he's cancelling DACA.

More than a few of his constituents are blasting the *expletive deleted*it out of him and calling him out on his and Congress' continuing failure to do its job and address the immigration/illegal alien issue.

I used to have a lot of respect for Gerry. I new him, talked with him frequently, broke bread with him. He even appointed me to my county commission seat.

But since he's gone to Washington he's turned into an absolute, utter, communist buffoon.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: makattak on September 19, 2017, 10:22:23 AM
My Rep., Gerry Connolly, is on his facebook pulpit this morning bitching about how Trump is creating a huge mess because he's cancelling DACA.

More than a few of his constituents are blasting the *expletive deleted*it out of him and calling him out on his and Congress' continuing failure to do its job and address the immigration/illegal alien issue.

I used to have a lot of respect for Gerry. I new him, talked with him frequently, broke bread with him. He even appointed me to my county commission seat.

But since he's gone to Washington he's turned into an absolute, utter, communist buffoon.

All the more reason for term limits. Staying in Washington appears to corrupt everyone.

Representatives and Senators ought to be keenly aware that they will be living under these laws and regulations that the approve. (I won't say "pass into law" because less and less of what the government does appears to be passed by Congress.)
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: MechAg94 on September 19, 2017, 11:17:25 AM
Yeah, you know, I want to give him benefit of the doubt, mostly because of what the GOPe has been doing. While I have no problems with him doing workarounds to that obstruction, I have a big problem if he just decides to go for spite and simply starts backing the dem agenda.
I am trying to leave room for 1) Trump trying to do some political maneuvering, and 2) most of the information I get is from Big Media that hates him and is constantly trying to get his supporters to turn on him.  I always try to keep in mind #2 as Big Media has been throwing the kitchen sink at trying to undermine Trump's support.  I don't want to give them a victory.

The Repubs in Congress get no room or benefit of the doubt at all.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: K Frame on September 19, 2017, 02:49:04 PM
All the more reason for term limits. Staying in Washington appears to corrupt everyone.

Representatives and Senators ought to be keenly aware that they will be living under these laws and regulations that the approve. (I won't say "pass into law" because less and less of what the government does appears to be passed by Congress.)


To be honest, he never should have gotten a freaking term in the first place.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Perd Hapley on September 20, 2017, 10:20:44 AM
They apparently shouted down Pelosi yesterday and completely rattled her. She cut her press conference or whatever it was short and left.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/09/18/protesters-call-out-pelosi-over-trump-daca-deal.html


But the Russians may have put them up to it, right?
http://www.dailywire.com/news/21319/idiotic-dem-senator-says-russia-blame-protest-joseph-curl


If the Democrats are so worried about foreign influence on our elections, why are they so determined to let in so many illegals and refugees into our country, and to loosen the rules on who gets to vote?  ;/
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: grampster on September 20, 2017, 10:23:31 AM

But the Russians may have put them up to it, right?
http://www.dailywire.com/news/21319/idiotic-dem-senator-says-russia-blame-protest-joseph-curl


If the Democrats are so worried about foreign influence on our elections, why are they so determined to let in so many illegals and refugees into our country, and to loosen the rules on who gets to vote?  ;/

You are assuming that the Democrat Party Collective and it's many Useful Idiots are not mentally ill.
Title: Re: DACA
Post by: Scout26 on September 20, 2017, 02:07:54 PM
Chickens coming home to roost ??