Government shutdown over illegals?

[richard_daily]

"Native American" is nothing more than a label attached to the most recent group of people in the America's to be overrun and dispossessed because they nether had a fucking immigration policy nor tried to enforce one until it was far too late.

And that's the history of the world in one sentence.

"An idiot's guide to fake history."

Cool story, bro.

 

[WoundedKnee]

Hello, RG.

Rueben Martinez is a presidential fellow in education at Chapman University in Orange, CA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubén_Martínez_(writer)

Wrong. What does RG stand for?

 

[WoundedKnee]

Instead of dwelling on the now past, we should look ahead 2 1/2 weeks when the Senate Democrats have refused to negotiate in good faith on immigration/budget issues and we reach the new deadline and Schumer once again lays down the gauntlet, DACA or shutdown. What happens then? because I'm telling you the same thing that I have been saying this whole time, for the Democrats, and by this, let me refine my comments, for the hard left, for Bernie, Pocahontas and Kamala, the wall, chain migration, the lottery and E-verify are DOA; Schumer, to retain power has to force the Congress to pass a clean DACA bill with no concessions.

Now, you can attack me or you can tell me what you think about what happens next.

 

[BobBalouski]

Instead of dwelling on the now past, we should look ahead 2 1/2 weeks when the Senate Democrats have refused to negotiate in good faith on immigration/budget issues and we reach the new deadline and Schumer once again lays down the gauntlet, DACA or shutdown. What happens then? because I'm telling you the same thing that I have been saying this whole time, for the Democrats, and by this, let me refine my comments, for the hard left, for Bernie, Pocahontas and Kamala, the wall, chain migration, the lottery and E-verify are DOA; Schumer, to retain power has to force the Congress to pass a clean DACA bill with no concessions.

Now, you can attack me or you can tell me what you think about what happens next.

Since Trump & the majority of Republicans favor amnesty for Dreamers just as much as Dems do - and I am totally against it - I most certainly do hope that Dems demand a straight up or down vote on DACA, because nothing less will point out better to Trump's core base how far he really does stand apart from them on such a key issue to them.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Since Trump & the majority of Republicans favor amnesty for Dreamers just as much as Dems do - and I am totally against it - I most certainly do hope that Dems demand a straight up or down vote on DACA, because nothing less will point out better to Trump's core base how far he really does stand apart from them on such a key issue to them.

Why are you against DACA people becoming citizens?

 

[WoundedKnee]

Since Trump & the majority of Republicans favor amnesty for Dreamers just as much as Dems do - and I am totally against it - I most certainly do hope that Dems demand a straight up or down vote on DACA, because nothing less will point out better to Trump's core base how far he really does stand apart from them on such a key issue to them.

That is an interesting thought, I shall reflect upon it. I will say that this may be a simplification of their position and that they do not favor an amnesty (the Democrat position), but rather, a path to citizenship.

 

[bellisarius]

Instead of dwelling on the now past, we should look ahead 2 1/2 weeks when the Senate Democrats have refused to negotiate in good faith on immigration/budget issues and we reach the new deadline and Schumer once again lays down the gauntlet, DACA or shutdown. What happens then? because I'm telling you the same thing that I have been saying this whole time, for the Democrats, and by this, let me refine my comments, for the hard left, for Bernie, Pocahontas and Kamala, the wall, chain migration, the lottery and E-verify are DOA; Schumer, to retain power has to force the Congress to pass a clean DACA bill with no concessions.

Now, you can attack me or you can tell me what you think about what happens next.

Schumer and the dems are going to fight like hell.

Re. E-verify. The administration is looking into putting that in place via an EO. That's the least desirable option but apparently it's doable.

Trump will get funding for "the wall." That can be rescinded/modified/eliminated by a future congress. The real fight is going to be over the chain/lottery issue and that's where the dems are on a slippery slope. While there is public support for the DACA crowd, there is NO truck with the chain/lottery bull shit.

Trump is virtually forced into using the DACA crowd as leverage in the negotiations in that if they are separated out it will be unlikely that he'll ever get anything through the senate on chain/lottery in the future unless there's an election tsunami this fall that no one is expecting.

 

[WoundedKnee]

Schumer and the dems are going to fight like hell.

Re. E-verify. The administration is looking into putting that in place via an EO. That's the least desirable option but apparently it's doable.

Trump will get funding for "the wall." That can be rescinded/modified/eliminated by a future congress. The real fight is going to be over the chain/lottery issue and that's where the dems are on a slippery slope. While there is public support for the DACA crowd, there is NO truck with the chain/lottery bull shit.

Trump is virtually forced into using the DACA crowd as leverage in the negotiations in that if they are separated out it will be unlikely that he'll ever get anything through the senate on chain/lottery in the future unless there's an election tsunami this fall that no one is expecting.

And that first point is the weak point of EOs as the Obama supporters are beginning to learn the hard way. If the next guy is not of your party, he can undo it. I would rather the Congress make it the law.

As for the latter points, I have to agree. The Democrats use the mantra of comprehensive immigration reform, in much the same way as they redefine terms such as tolerance and diversity, as a virtue signal that means DACA amnesty and nothing else. They pretty much like chain migration, the lottery, no verification for employers* and no photo ID to vote.



* in fact, this is one of their gambits; Republicans want cheap labor!

 

[BobBalouski]

Why are you against DACA people becoming citizens?

I'm not: I admire and salute all who desire to become law-abiding, Constitution-loving, patriotic American citizens. In fact, I champion stripping all American socialists (especially natural born) of their "Republican Form of Government"-hating citizenship and expelling them to make more room for the former.

Why do you so disingenuously ask?

 

[BobBalouski]

That is an interesting thought, I shall reflect upon it. I will say that this may be a simplification of their position and that they do not favor an amnesty (the Democrat position), but rather, a path to citizenship.

One can apply all the "path to citizenship" lipstick one wishes, but to the core of Trump's base, it's still a big, fat amnesty pig. They don't believe conscious adults who have long stayed in the country illegally should be granted some special privilege that others have consciously chosen to pursue legally.

And when one does consider Trump's ideological base, one must always keep in mind how small it practically is, yet how absolutely vital it is to his political success (as the 2016 elections unarguably proved).

Dems should also remember one thing: many so-called blue collar Americans, many who voted Dem til Trump (think WI, MI, PA), totally know a big, fat pig when they see one, too.

Schumer truly doesn't have any nads unless he calls Trump's & the Reps bluff on DACA.

 

[BobBalouski]

As far as the E-verify baloney goes: it's already illegal for companies under US jurisdiction to hire illegals - but that still happens just as absolutely frequently as intentionally & openly violating existing federal law against harboring and aiding illegals does. Thus E-verify is simply more cosmetic bullshit, not any type of serious bargaining chip.

Same for chain migration: there's no way in hell Dreamers will be allowed to stay without ALSO allowing the core of their family support systems to stay, too (including the very ones who intentionally broke US law bringing Dreamers here in the first place). Thus it becomes not a matter of chain migration actually existing, but totally a matter of how much chain migration is allowed after negotiating the specific numbers.

Dreamers legalized. Illegal employment as existent as it's always been. Chain migration lessened a bit, at best. It's almost like no one's still around who didn't watch basically this same bullcrap dance back in 1986.

 

[Rightguide]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rubén_Martínez_(writer)

Wrong. What does RG stand for?

He's trying to say you are me.

 

[coati]

In fact, I champion stripping all American socialists (especially natural born) of their "Republican Form of Government"-hating citizenship and expelling them

Yeah, because that would be totally Constitutional and "American". Sounds like you are as American as apple pie and lynch mobs...

 

[richard_daily]

Schumer and the dems are going to fight like hell.

Re. E-verify. The administration is looking into putting that in place via an EO. That's the least desirable option but apparently it's doable.

Trump will get funding for "the wall." That can be rescinded/modified/eliminated by a future congress. The real fight is going to be over the chain/lottery issue and that's where the dems are on a slippery slope. While there is public support for the DACA crowd, there is NO truck with the chain/lottery bull shit.

Trump is virtually forced into using the DACA crowd as leverage in the negotiations in that if they are separated out it will be unlikely that he'll ever get anything through the senate on chain/lottery in the future unless there's an election tsunami this fall that no one is expecting.

E-verify is big government.

You like big government.

 

[bellisarius]

And that first point is the weak point of EOs as the Obama supporters are beginning to learn the hard way. If the next guy is not of your party, he can undo it. I would rather the Congress make it the law.

As for the latter points, I have to agree. The Democrats use the mantra of comprehensive immigration reform, in much the same way as they redefine terms such as tolerance and diversity, as a virtue signal that means DACA amnesty and nothing else. They pretty much like chain migration, the lottery, no verification for employers* and no photo ID to vote.



* in fact, this is one of their gambits; Republicans want cheap labor!

Sadly that is a fact, so do the democrats but the democrats get the added bonus of voters. Some republicans are beginning to realize that the benefits of that cheap labor isn't worth the cost. Reducing the cost of certain goods and services just so you can raise taxes to deal with the health/welfare cost doesn't really add up in the end.

 

[BobBalouski]

Yeah, because that would be totally Constitutional and "American". Sounds like you are as American as apple pie and lynch mobs...

The Constitution commands/guarantees a "Republican Form of Government"; socialists, by political definition, and American socialists in particular, are direct domestic enemies to that constitutional mandate. Socialists who swear "to support and defend the Constitution" are nothing different than Muslim al-taqiyyars - intentional liars - and thus self-convict themselves of perjury of oath - an unarguable impeachable offense.

Naturally unalieanble, American individual liberty is just as unarguably best served with the absolute minimal # of domestic enemy socialists involved as possible.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The Constitution commands/guarantees a "Republican Form of Government"; socialists, by political definition, and American socialists in particular, are direct domestic enemies to that constitutional mandate. Socialists who swear "to support and defend the Constitution" are nothing different than Muslim al-taqiyyars - intentional liars - and thus self-convict themselves of perjury of oath - an unarguable impeachable offense.

Naturally unalieanble, American individual liberty is just as unarguably best served with the absolute minimal # of domestic enemy socialists involved as possible.

It doesn't understand that it is socialism, especially in the academic sense is largely unconstitutional and wholly un-American.

They wish they were Bolsheviki, but they have neither the legal support nor the willpower to go exterminate 40 million people for their cause.

 

[richard_daily]

They wish they were Bolsheviki, but they have neither the legal support nor the willpower to go exterminate 40 million people for their cause.

The Bolsheviks didn't do that, but I don't expect you to understand history.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The Bolsheviks didn't do that, but I don't expect you to understand history.

You're right they only killed an estimated 100,000-200,000.....mass murder in 1918 Russia wasn't documented in the best of details.

Adjust for population/demographics and your socialist friends would only need to kill few million Americans to get on the same level.

Best of luck to you and your comrades

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I'm not: I admire and salute all who desire to become law-abiding, Constitution-loving, patriotic American citizens. In fact, I champion stripping all American socialists (especially natural born) of their "Republican Form of Government"-hating citizenship and expelling them to make more room for the former.

Why do you so disingenuously ask?

I asked honestly. A shame you decided you wouldn't honestly answer.

 

[coati]

The Constitution commands/guarantees a "Republican Form of Government"; socialists, by political definition, and American socialists in particular, are direct domestic enemies to that constitutional mandate. Socialists who swear "to support and defend the Constitution" are nothing different than Muslim al-taqiyyars - intentional liars - and thus self-convict themselves of perjury of oath - an unarguable impeachable offense.

Naturally unalieanble, American individual liberty is just as unarguably best served with the absolute minimal # of domestic enemy socialists involved as possible.

Aside from the stuff that BuzyBody (and his associated succession of alts) writes on a regular basis, this stuff you just wrote is the kookiest thing I have seen on the Lit Boards. Congratulations, you just limboed under a very low bar.

And so you are going to "champion" the expulsion of all socialists (with your definition, I assume) from America. McCarthy tried that with Communists in his version of purging "un-American" citizens, so I guess you represent a new movement to try something similar with socialists, who are generally more associated with economic theory rather than a specific political party.

Makes sense that an idea like this would pop up during the Stable Genius's regime, along with other kook groups such as those who incited violence in Charlottesville.

Good luck with purging the socialists. I assume Bernie Sanders would be a prime target, but eventually you said you would champion deporting everyone who meets your definition of a socialist.

 

[Hypoxia]

The Constitution commands/guarantees blah blah blah

Your bullshit has been debunked many times. The 'how' and 'why' it's bullshit has been carefully explained so I'll waste no effort reiterating. Stuff it.

 

[WoundedKnee]

One can apply all the "path to citizenship" lipstick one wishes, but to the core of Trump's base, it's still a big, fat amnesty pig. They don't believe conscious adults who have long stayed in the country illegally should be granted some special privilege that others have consciously chosen to pursue legally.

And when one does consider Trump's ideological base, one must always keep in mind how small it practically is, yet how absolutely vital it is to his political success (as the 2016 elections unarguably proved).

Dems should also remember one thing: many so-called blue collar Americans, many who voted Dem til Trump (think WI, MI, PA), totally know a big, fat pig when they see one, too.

Schumer truly doesn't have any nads unless he calls Trump's & the Reps bluff on DACA.

As far as the E-verify baloney goes: it's already illegal for companies under US jurisdiction to hire illegals - but that still happens just as absolutely frequently as intentionally & openly violating existing federal law against harboring and aiding illegals does. Thus E-verify is simply more cosmetic bullshit, not any type of serious bargaining chip.

Same for chain migration: there's no way in hell Dreamers will be allowed to stay without ALSO allowing the core of their family support systems to stay, too (including the very ones who intentionally broke US law bringing Dreamers here in the first place). Thus it becomes not a matter of chain migration actually existing, but totally a matter of how much chain migration is allowed after negotiating the specific numbers.

Dreamers legalized. Illegal employment as existent as it's always been. Chain migration lessened a bit, at best. It's almost like no one's still around who didn't watch basically this same bullcrap dance back in 1986.

Schumer is between a rock and a hard place between moderate Democrats that he needs to get elected in states Trump got elected in and the vocal and vicious hard Left base that is increasingly calling the shots when it comes to the direction of the Party. If he wants to deliver the Senate and not hurt the chances for the House, he has to placate both factions and he leans towards the Left because they will go to war against him and the proof of that came out this morning as Lying Schumer (a new label) took back his offer of a wall (forcing Trump to declare DACA dead). Clearly Schumer now believes that going to the Left and shutting down the government again is the winning strategy.

E-verify. Yes, it is illegal to hire them, but there is no way, without a sound system to verify forged paperwork. This, then is the difference. In recent days, I have had this conversation with others and when we talk about the hiring of illegals, most people think corporate America, which, outside of a few sectors, does not do and they have the resources to do background checks. It is the mom and pops, the restaurant industry, sectors such as that that knowingly hire illegals and do not have the resources to verify the status of their hires. This would help them if they care about being law-abiding businesses. Additionally, I have long held that we need to stiffen the penalties upon employers at the same time.

Chain migration is the bringing in of new family members in order to keep the family together. I'd as soon send them back to Mexico. There are too many lies being told. Number one is that these kids don't know Spanish. That's bullshit when you think about it. When they arrived here (all of them being "carried" in) where they brought in by English speakers or Spanish speakers? I'd submit that the majority of them grew up with a working knowledge and use use of Spanish as the language of the family home. They, for the most part, are bilingual.

But you dry up the employment opportunities and they will self-deport. And lets face it, if the canard is true that these children, because of the education, nutrition, etc., they received here as Dreamers make them assets to the nation, then sending them home as educated assets is going to be just as good for Mexico (or whatever southern country the originated from) and they need highly-educated workers.

 

[WoundedKnee]

Sadly that is a fact, so do the democrats but the democrats get the added bonus of voters. Some republicans are beginning to realize that the benefits of that cheap labor isn't worth the cost. Reducing the cost of certain goods and services just so you can raise taxes to deal with the health/welfare cost doesn't really add up in the end.

For the most part, I agree, not only do they keep wages depressed, but inflation eats away at the purchasing power of a middle class that is currently under great duress, not just to support their families but to support the social justice welfare state. It also does a number on the African-American citizen who wants to work their way into the middle class.

 

[bellisarius]

Schumer is between a rock and a hard place between moderate Democrats that he needs to get elected in states Trump got elected in and the vocal and vicious hard Left base that is increasingly calling the shots when it comes to the direction of the Party. If he wants to deliver the Senate and not hurt the chances for the House, he has to placate both factions and he leans towards the Left because they will go to war against him and the proof of that came out this morning as Lying Schumer (a new label) took back his offer of a wall (forcing Trump to declare DACA dead). Clearly Schumer now believes that going to the Left and shutting down the government again is the winning strategy.

E-verify. Yes, it is illegal to hire them, but there is no way, without a sound system to verify forged paperwork. This, then is the difference. In recent days, I have had this conversation with others and when we talk about the hiring of illegals, most people think corporate America, which, outside of a few sectors, does not do and they have the resources to do background checks. It is the mom and pops, the restaurant industry, sectors such as that that knowingly hire illegals and do not have the resources to verify the status of their hires. This would help them if they care about being law-abiding businesses. Additionally, I have long held that we need to stiffen the penalties upon employers at the same time.

Chain migration is the bringing in of new family members in order to keep the family together. I'd as soon send them back to Mexico. There are too many lies being told. Number one is that these kids don't know Spanish. That's bullshit when you think about it. When they arrived here (all of them being "carried" in) where they brought in by English speakers or Spanish speakers? I'd submit that the majority of them grew up with a working knowledge and use use of Spanish as the language of the family home. They, for the most part, are bilingual.

But you dry up the employment opportunities and they will self-deport. And lets face it, if the canard is true that these children, because of the education, nutrition, etc., they received here as Dreamers make them assets to the nation, then sending them home as educated assets is going to be just as good for Mexico (or whatever southern country the originated from) and they need highly-educated workers.

Before I get into the emboldened portion just a comment on Schumer. It appears he's caved to the rabid left. If the reports are to be believed he put the 'Wall' on the table last Fri. but after the backlash over the reopening of the government by the rabid left he's clawed it back. Obviously this is not going to sit well with the administration in future negotiations.

As to the emboldened, you're right. Mexico really does need these people if the nation is going to advance. Politically they're about 100 years behind us if not more. They still run on the Patron system and their laws more closely resemble those of 16th century Spain's than those of a 21st century nation.