Great article: "Democrats are in a Bubble on Immigration"

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're in a bubble of xenophobia. Immigrants are a net positive to the country; asylum is a fundamental human right; and democrats are demonstrably not against border controls.

We want more LEGAL immigrants. But nice try, PP.

Bans from Muslim countries and how many kids in concentration camps, kids whose parents were LEGALLY seeking refugee status suggests this is not actually the case.

The remains of the concentration camps are in Europe, my friend. Go see them.

so many people who LOVE Godwin's Law!

You all should form an online forum. How many posts does it take BEFORE someone resurrects Godwin's Law?

Mike Godwin weighed in on this. He says it's appropriate to call these concentration camps.

Good for him
I disagree.

DP

How can you call them concentration camps when the people voluntarily walked into them?

And, really, the comparison is offensive.

because the children can't get out dumbass.

[Anonymous]

How can you call them concentration camps when the people voluntarily walked into them?

And, really, the comparison is offensive.


because the children can't get out dumbass.

Many are unaccompanied minors who did walk in by themselves.
Some were brought in by child traffickers.
Some were brought by their parents.

They all came (or were brought) based on the fact that if a child gets across the border, they will not be sent back. Many were tickets to America.

Where do you want them to go? With child traffickers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

How can you call them concentration camps when the people voluntarily walked into them?

And, really, the comparison is offensive.


because the children can't get out dumbass.

Many are unaccompanied minors who did walk in by themselves.
Some were brought in by child traffickers.
Some were brought by their parents.

They all came (or were brought) based on the fact that if a child gets across the border, they will not be sent back. Many were tickets to America.

Where do you want them to go? With child traffickers?

Deceptive rhetorical tactic. There are obviously many other solutions between "child trafficker" and "locked up in conditions that would be unconstitutional for death row inmates."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

How can you call them concentration camps when the people voluntarily walked into them?

And, really, the comparison is offensive.


because the children can't get out dumbass.

Many are unaccompanied minors who did walk in by themselves.
Some were brought in by child traffickers.
Some were brought by their parents.

They all came (or were brought) based on the fact that if a child gets across the border, they will not be sent back. Many were tickets to America.

Where do you want them to go? With child traffickers?

Yeah
So who's the dumb ass again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

How can you call them concentration camps when the people voluntarily walked into them?

And, really, the comparison is offensive.


because the children can't get out dumbass.

Many are unaccompanied minors who did walk in by themselves.
Some were brought in by child traffickers.
Some were brought by their parents.

They all came (or were brought) based on the fact that if a child gets across the border, they will not be sent back. Many were tickets to America.

Where do you want them to go? With child traffickers?

Deceptive rhetorical tactic. There are obviously many other solutions between "child trafficker" and "locked up in conditions that would be unconstitutional for death row inmates."

+1. We could start by agreeing to let them have toothbrushes.

[Anonymous]

If ILLEGAL aliens get toothbrushes, the terrorists win. Why do you hate America?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're in a bubble of xenophobia. Immigrants are a net positive to the country; asylum is a fundamental human right; and democrats are demonstrably not against border controls.

We want more LEGAL immigrants. But nice try, PP.

Bans from Muslim countries and how many kids in concentration camps, kids whose parents were LEGALLY seeking refugee status suggests this is not actually the case.

The remains of the concentration camps are in Europe, my friend. Go see them.

so many people who LOVE Godwin's Law!

You all should form an online forum. How many posts does it take BEFORE someone resurrects Godwin's Law?

Mike Godwin weighed in on this. He says it's appropriate to call these concentration camps.

Good for him
I disagree.

Disagree all you want, just don't claim that the use of the term "concentration camps" is a basis for invoking Godwin's Law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“NOBODY WANTS OPEN BORDERS. You're pushing a GOP strawman. Shame.”

Maybe not literally open but near about.

Castro is getting all kinds of applause for pushing this idea of turning coming here without permission and just deciding you will stay into a minor offense - and most of the stage agreed with him Thursday.

Many also said let’s give people here illegally free health insurance.

And many Dems are opposing the reasonable idea of not qualifying for asylum in most cases if you have passed up multiple countries to get here rather than getting away from the country where someone is persecuting you and into a different one.

Another idea that got a lot of traction was not deporting people so long as they illegally show up here and then keep their nose clean.

So- unless you decide to commit a major crime like rape or murder sure sounds a lot like anyone around the world can just up and decide they plan to live in the US with virtually no disincentive to doing so.

Unless the fraud party of trickle down economics and the conman proposes a mandatory e-verify they are the ones really for open borders by all means. Because if you chock off the employment the trickle will stop except for the desperate ones. Cry all you want but what was the conman doing for 2 years when they had full govt control? Not a peep about mandatory e-verify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you for whom immigration is your #1 issue -- what exactly is it that bothers you so much?

I am SO much more bothered by the idea that our country is caging children. And I dearly hope there are more voters like me than there are children of immigrants (all of you) rushing to slam shut the door to freedom and opportunity.

If we had proper border controls, we wouldn't be in charge of those children. We wouldn't have unaccompanied minors entering our country when we weren't prepared to take over care for them. We wouldn't have concerns about children being trafficked and needing to separate them from the adults they are with. We would be able to turn away people with criminal records before they entered our country, so we wouldn't need to separate them from their children in order to deal with how we're required to handle adults and children differently.

I agree that "kids in cages" is terrible. The way to handle it is to control our borders so we're not forced into situations we're not prepared for. Other countries do not essentially set up refugee camps within their borders for people attempting to enter illegally. Border controls happen at the border. People wait to enter.

Unfortunately, our politicians have repeatedly sabotaged our border controls and control of our interior, and establishing control is going to be challenging and painful. If we want a robust safety net, including some form of single payer health care, and I think we do, we cannot have open borders. If we're willing to forgo a robust safety net, then open borders might work.

If all we do is cry about "kids in cages" and not how we got here and what all of the causes are, we can guarantee ourselves this same conversation until the US is in a similar situation as our southern neighbors (difficulty handling influx of needy people, lower standards of living, more crime and dissatisfaction with possibilities, more desire for economic migration by citizens), and Canada starts having this conversation and we wail and moan about those meanies maintaining their border.

Not one word about mandatory e-verify from you or the conman or the GOP. Why not? Are you worried employers like trump may never be able to hire illegals with mandatory e-verify?

Since you have trouble reading, I'll pull it out for you:
"Unfortunately, our politicians have repeatedly sabotaged our border controls and control of our interior"

All of our politicians have failed on this. If you think it's just the Dems or just the GOP, you are a useful idiot. Both parties have had multiple opportunities to prevent where we are now, and they have both failed terribly, and they're being very successful at winding you up and pointing you in the direction they want.

Who is in power now ? Who had full control of government for 2 years? Why wasn’t anything done about e-verify?

Keep looking at problems as snapshots in time, and not a complex series of actions (and lack thereof) and good luck solving any of them.

I agree the GOP is failing now. And the Dems failed earlier. And if everyone keeps looking only when they feel "they other" should be fixing it, nothing will be solved.

This isn't a GOP problem or a Dem problem. This is a problem for our country. They have both failed to solve it, or even put good effort into fixing it. But sure go ahead. It's the GOPs fault. And we'll be back here in another 10 years where you claim the exact same thing, blissfully ignoring the periods of time when your party, or both parties together, could have done something.

You're a useful idiot.

You are the gop and conman voter, not me. And they are the ones railing immigration all the time. The country has a major opioid crisis, a stupid tariff war hurting our agriculture, historic inequality due to tax cut after tax cuts for the rich , and yet they are ruling up immigration even though it is at a 10 year low. The fraud party rules up immigration because they have no policy for the middle class and poor. They only want to take away their benefits. But demagogue immigration boogeyman to continue to divide Americans and win. The slavey era EC because no matter how much they cheat and suppress votes a majority of Americans aren’t with the GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Then we need to pass mandatory E-verify opposed by TRUMP and GOP because they love the businessmen to hire illegals. Who else will pay for their election expenses? If you stop the job spigot then we can manage the refugee issue.

I am trying to educate my myself about E-verify. The Wikipedia article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Verify

seems dated, but says that 16 mainly Republican states require some sort of E-verify, while three mainly Democratic state (California, Rhode Island, Illinois) *prohibit* the use of E-verify. Of course, there would be advantages to Federal E-verify but employment law has traditionally been a State issue.

Where have you seen that Trump and the GOP oppose Federal E-verify?

Of course, many jobs for illegal immigrants will continue even with E-verify. I know of house painters where the boss is a US citizen, but who hires illegal immigrants off the streets (at sub minimum wage) when he needs extra work for the day. There is no paperwork involved.

Immigration is federal authority, not state rights. That the conman and Russian puppet has never uttered a word about e-verify tells a lot. Because he doesn’t e-verify in ALL his properties and just doubled the h2b right after he became “precedent” because he can never find waitresses in America.

[Anonymous]

Whoever likes their cheap domestic labor,
will fight anything that will mess with that.

Parents might have to do their own babysitting
and housecleaning if they can’t have cheap foreigners, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no illegal immigrant problem in most of the U.S. For much of the immigration haters is just the sorehead factor. Unless you are a Native American you are the spawn of immigrants who did exactly what these current immigrants want to do, which is find a better life in the U.S. There were just no immigration laws then.

Dems tried to pass immigration reform when Obama was president. Republicans bloced them, as they always do.

Of course they did. Party over country for the GOP every damn time. They would allow this country to be destroyed if the alternative was having a Democrat save it.

I would say you've got that exactly wrong. Party over country for liberals, every damn time. You would allow this country to be destroyed by admitting millions of illegal immigrants if the alternative is voting for Trump in 2020.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think you're in a bubble of xenophobia. Immigrants are a net positive to the country; asylum is a fundamental human right; and democrats are demonstrably not against border controls.

We want more LEGAL immigrants. But nice try, PP.

Bans from Muslim countries and how many kids in concentration camps, kids whose parents were LEGALLY seeking refugee status suggests this is not actually the case.

The remains of the concentration camps are in Europe, my friend. Go see them.

+100
I think it would be extremely instructive for liberals to take a trip to Auschwitz and learn about the atrocities that occurred at *actual* concentration camps. Or at the very least, a field trip to the Holocaust Museum would be eye-opening.

Oh no, we are NOT doing this bullshit again. Call them concentration camps or not, but ALL observers in good faith of Republican rhetoric and actions towards immigrants since Trump see the absolutely clear parallels between the xenophobic ideas and policies that lead to the Holocaust and the language and rhetoric and actions towards immigrants.

The fact is, the Democratic party has never been pro illegal immigration -- Obama deported by the planeload. What we want is HUMANE treatment of people at the border, not open borders.

It makes me tear my hair out that the Bannon/Miller ploy to stoke xenophobia and use immigrant children as a way to garner votes is working. Yet, it is. We (Democrats) have no choice but to stand up for humane treatment of immigrants, yet immigration status has been so effectively weaponized by the Republican establishment that it may be a losing proposition.

All I have to say is SHAME, SHAME ON YOU. If you're Christian, this is not what Christ wanted you to do.

Please do explain to us exactly what you would have the U.S. do - at our expense, of course - to shelter and feed the thousands of immigrants waiting on asylum processing? I mean, that we aren't *already* doing, of course. And remember, the Trump administration bought beds for the children who are there and liberals decided they didn't like that. Surprise, surprise, I guess you would prefer the children continue sleeping on the floor. SMDH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you for whom immigration is your #1 issue -- what exactly is it that bothers you so much?

I am SO much more bothered by the idea that our country is caging children. And I dearly hope there are more voters like me than there are children of immigrants (all of you) rushing to slam shut the door to freedom and opportunity.

Why not keep the borders open for ALL the Latinos,
Africans and Asians who want to come?

Um, how many can YOU house, feed and educate?

Dishonest rhetoric. I am not in favor of open borders. I am in favor of humane treatment at the borders.

Describe to us what your vision of "humane treatment" looks like.
-DP