Pritzker urges Texas Gov. Greg Abbott to stop migrant dropoffs amid winter storm: ‘I plead with you for mercy’

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Yep. And remember every convoy/caravan since? DCUM's finest insisted it was just fiction, somehow created by the right-wing to sow discord, just "Fox talking points." That's what we heard from the gaslighters who wanted Americans to believe none of this was actually happening. And now that blue cities are seeing it up close and personal, all of a sudden it's "sociopathic" and "cruel"! Honestly, this is my single-issue election year. Disgust doesn't even cover it anymore.

Maybe everyday Democrats were unaware of how devastating this really is. It's taken a desperate act on the part of Texas to make everyday people who don't live in Texas understand this is a crisis.

Bottom line: News sources have been downplaying this crisis. They aren't telling us the truth.

The government at both the federal and state levels know exactly how bad this problem is, because they receive intelligence.

Why? Perhaps we should be asking why our news sources and elected officials are gaslighting the American people.

They know it’s devastating, they are happy with it. They view it as a mechanism to turn Texas blue and make Abbot look racist and evil because he doesn’t “care” about people who are here illegally.

Now he’s sending people to blue states and they are crying for mercy. He’s sending a small percentage of people to Sanctuary cities that welcome immigrants, who supposedly have a bigger heart and want to protect vulnerable people. Unlike those terrible republicans. And the Sanctuary cities can’t handle it because no one can handle it. That’s the point.

It’s past time for this political charade to end.

How will it turn Texas blue? These people aren’t voters

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Whatever you feel about immigration and policies, I am so appalled at conservative's absolute inhumanity.

They have allowed themselves to dehumanize real, living, flesh and blood people to "illegals" and political pawns.

It seems to me you can make your arguments about stemming illegal immigration and refugees and asylum seekers without letting yourself become so cold, hard, and bloodless.

Read through the posts here...absolutely horrifying in their lack of empathy and humanity.

This whole thing is about "owning the libs" and getting one over on sanctuary cities and dehumanizing people so you can score points against "Leftists" and democrats.

Yes, "ha, ha, ha you're not as compassionate as you claim you are" is the stupidest comeback ever. Article here about how migrants are looking to reunite with family/friends in red states, but are routed to blue states because Abbott won't bus to red states.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/the-toll-on-migrants-of-a-free-bus-north-from-the-border/ar-AA1mOga4

Interesting how many Turnip fans posting about migration lately. It's a distraction from abortion and January 6th. Everyone knows it but you Turnip fans, and I'm sure it will blow up on the GOP like every other crazy thing they've been doing lately. Millennials and Gen Z will be the majority voting bloc in 2028 and they vote heavily Dem. Good luck, GOP. 2024 is your last chance and we know it.

Maybe their family/friends should pay for their bus tickets - that way they are free to go anywhere?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the inhumanity. Drugged up children are being trafficked at the border by single adult men.

It’s all by design, that’s why the Biden administration is allowing the border to be wide open. The useful idiots attack republicans and conservatives as heartless and cold while children are being sex trafficked, it’s enough to make anyone physically ill.

Republicans keep PROVING themselves to be heartless and cold at every step of the way. AND, the Republicans have done exactly jack shit in 30+ years to help reform any laws. The only thing they do is make things worse and prevent any fixes to provoke outrage. Proven, over and over and over and over.

Show me meaningful bills going to the House floor, not misrepresented videos.

Biden is refusing to enforce existing immigration law.

Immigration law is full of holes and problems which create this mess. And Republicans refuse to fix any of it.

Until recently, the only “fixes” put forward by both parties were basically more technology on the border, more staff to process migrants faster (not to deport… but process—catch and release), and more visas (they won’t be a problem if they just come legally so lets make migrating more permissive!).

I did not and do not view these as fixes. I’d rather see employers have to hire Americans and forced to pay higher wages or innovate. This is not 1912, we don’t need massive amounts of cheap labor for factories. We do not give land away to homesteaders. Most of our population has at least a high school education (compared to early 20th century where finishing highschool was relatively rare so the migrants coming were pretty much of the same education/skill level) and now even that isn’t good enough to comfortably raise a family.

I do not live on the border but I do live in a city that over 30 years was drastically changed because the AG industry attracted a lot of migrants to do farm work. If you don’t see the problems that continuously increasing population with people in poverty causes— the stress on limited resources and public goods, the crime (caused by poverty), the community disinvestment, the overburdened schools, the resentment that comes from seeing people who just recently came here being given things for free that LMC-MC-UMC families have to pay for yourself and either through burden-shifting or taxes also end up paying for newcomers..

It’s always been an uphill battle to explain this to people in metro areas who are insulated from seeing these things first hand—yet they think they understand because they work with migrants who we welcomed here because they’re highly skilled and educated or just wealthy. It’s not the same, and these deep blue cities are finally understanding this. Since they are experiencing it first hand.

I consider labor shortages wonderful. I have never known anything bad to come from a labor shortage, and what we are doing with our immigration policy is keeping the labor market in constant surplus.

Vernon Briggs
Cornell Labor Economist

The underlying truth about the immigration battle is that is is fundamentally between those with an insatiable appetite for more cheap, disposable, foreign workers, and those who embrace the social good of tight labor markets.

That is one of the many underlying truths. Others are that a modicum of diversity handled with care is definitely a strength—while mass diversity foisted upon an unwilling populous who is then forced to provide for and subsidize the “diverse” part of the population is a surefire way to breed resentment.
There’s nothing wrong with homogeneity. And sometimes being homogeneous actually breeds more support for institutions, causes a greater investment in public goods, greater community trust, etc. Even if that homogeneity is just a shared national identity (e.g. lets give ourselves time to absorb and assimilate immigrants who have been here, so they consider themselves first and foremost Americans. Regardless of race. Like Singapore. A naturally occurring multi-ethnic country that focused on creating a national identity that was more important than ethnicity.. and who are currently one of the only examples of a successful non-ethnically-homogeneous country?…)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.

"Hold on, I’m confused. What does Chicago’s status as a sanctuary city have to do with caring for the migrants now arriving in large numbers?

Nothing. Chicago’s status as a sanctuary city does not require it to encourage immigrants to move to Chicago nor does the Welcoming City ordinance obligate officials to use taxpayer funds to care for immigrants in Chicago.

In addition, the 18,500 migrants sent to Chicago so far are in the country legally after requesting asylum after fleeing persecution and economic collapse. The ordinance focuses on protections for undocumented immigrants, so it does not apply to any of the migrants.

However, Chicago’s long-standing promise to serve as a haven for immigrants made it a target for Trump, while he was president, and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott picked up where his political ally left off."
https://news.wttw.com/2023/10/20/what-does-it-mean-chicago-sanctuary-city-here-s-what-know

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.

For the 6,473rd time, that is not what "sanctuary city" means in Chicago or most other cities. All it means is that they will not enforce federal immigration laws or help CBP do their jobs for them. It DOES NOT mean "we will house and feed everyone" or any of the other such nonsense claims being made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.

"Hold on, I’m confused. What does Chicago’s status as a sanctuary city have to do with caring for the migrants now arriving in large numbers?

Nothing. Chicago’s status as a sanctuary city does not require it to encourage immigrants to move to Chicago nor does the Welcoming City ordinance obligate officials to use taxpayer funds to care for immigrants in Chicago.

In addition, the 18,500 migrants sent to Chicago so far are in the country legally after requesting asylum after fleeing persecution and economic collapse. The ordinance focuses on protections for undocumented immigrants, so it does not apply to any of the migrants.

However, Chicago’s long-standing promise to serve as a haven for immigrants made it a target for Trump, while he was president, and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott picked up where his political ally left off."
https://news.wttw.com/2023/10/20/what-does-it-mean-chicago-sanctuary-city-here-s-what-know

Bet you dollars to donuts that Abbott's guys are falsely telling migrants that Chicago all of that, that Chicago will house and feed them to get them to "agree" to get on the bus north.

[Anonymous]

^ migrants they are sending to Chicago

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.

For the 6,473rd time, that is not what "sanctuary city" means in Chicago or most other cities. All it means is that they will not enforce federal immigration laws or help CBP do their jobs for them. It DOES NOT mean "we will house and feed everyone" or any of the other such nonsense claims being made.

In other words, we Chicagoans don't think we should have to enforce immigration laws because large groups of immigrants don't affect us. We like to sound kind and welcoming to immigrants. Just don't let too many of them come here. It might overburden our schools and services, but it's fine for Texas and other states to be overburdened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.

For the 6,473rd time, that is not what "sanctuary city" means in Chicago or most other cities. All it means is that they will not enforce federal immigration laws or help CBP do their jobs for them. It DOES NOT mean "we will house and feed everyone" or any of the other such nonsense claims being made.

So who should house and feed them? Announcing you are a sanctuary city is virtue signaling. Put your money where your mouth is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.

For the 6,473rd time, that is not what "sanctuary city" means in Chicago or most other cities. All it means is that they will not enforce federal immigration laws or help CBP do their jobs for them. It DOES NOT mean "we will house and feed everyone" or any of the other such nonsense claims being made.

In other words, we Chicagoans don't think we should have to enforce immigration laws because large groups of immigrants don't affect us. We like to sound kind and welcoming to immigrants. Just don't let too many of them come here. It might overburden our schools and services, but it's fine for Texas and other states to be overburdened.

It is NOT fine for Texas to be overburdened. It is also NOT fine for Chicago to be overburdened, particularly intentionally and at great cost by another state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

Biden is the President of the U.S. If law enforcement is dumping people in Texas, like you say it is, Biden's administration is dumping people in Texas. That is Biden's administration's policy. Why is that Wrong #1?

Sometimes, life is about making tough decisions, and everything is not always about being wrong or right. Sometimes both choices can be wrong or both choices can be right. However, leaders must weigh the pros and cons and make the best decision decision they can.

If the Biden administration has decided " dumping people" in Texas ( your words) is the best decision it could make, then it's fair for Texas to " dump" some of them in other states in order to share the burden.

It's fair for Texas to dump them in states that seem more willing to have them. Sanctuary cities could have quietly been sanctuaries, just as Obama quietly deported illegal immigrants. Their announcement of their sanctuary status was a position meant to declare that they are taking a stance to be less hostile to these groups. Okay. Message received by Texas: take, here are some of them.

If Chicago likes it can " dump" some of them in another state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Republicans are sociopaths. They don't care. They don't care if people freeze, starve, or whatever. And, the cruelty isn't by accident, it's by design.

What’s stopping the people living in the sanctuary city of Chicago from housing these people? Why don’t the good democrats take them in to stop them from freezing to death?

What is Chicago supposed to do, pick up a stick along a roadside and wave it around Harry Potter style while yelling "Habitatum ex nihilo" expecting housing to magically appear out of nowhere?

That’s what Texas is expected to do.

It’s amazing that you don’t realize that.

No state or city can deal with the numbers of people flooding the border. Texas is showing people what has been happening there for years.

Wait until the hospitals, ERs, and schools of Chicago feel the full impact. It’s devastating. I lived in South Texas for 4 years and relocated for work recently. My family still lives there. It’s becoming worse by the day.

It is amazing that you don't realize that if it is wrong and a hardship to have no control over people "flooding" the state, it is EQUALLY IF NOT MORE wrong to intentionally do that to another state. It is as though people never learned that two wrongs don't make a right...

DP.

I will never vote for a Republican, but on this one issue, I say Bravo to Abbot!

The only way Democrats are going to be serious about illegal immigration is if blue states are burdened with the costs.

I am a bleeding heart liberal, but Democrats are hypocrites on this issue.

This "two wrongs don't make a right" argument is similar to Republicans' argument on abortion: 'the fetus' life is precious and most be saved, but you dare not ask us to help you take care of it.'

I'm the PP you quoted and do not understand the comparison you are making here. What TX is doing with dumping people:
Wrong #1: done to Texas: lax immigration enforcement lets people flood the city
Wrong #2: done to Chicago: Texas intentionally dumps people in their city without notice or time to prepare.

Wrong #2 does not become Right because of Wrong #1.

How does your analogy track that?

new poster here
By declaring themselves "sanctuary cities" these cities have already agreed to take in these people. There's no "wrong" about it.

For the 6,473rd time, that is not what "sanctuary city" means in Chicago or most other cities. All it means is that they will not enforce federal immigration laws or help CBP do their jobs for them. It DOES NOT mean "we will house and feed everyone" or any of the other such nonsense claims being made.

In other words, we Chicagoans don't think we should have to enforce immigration laws because large groups of immigrants don't affect us. We like to sound kind and welcoming to immigrants. Just don't let too many of them come here. It might overburden our schools and services, but it's fine for Texas and other states to be overburdened.

It is NOT fine for Texas to be overburdened. It is also NOT fine for Chicago to be overburdened, particularly intentionally and at great cost by another state.

So where should these people go? We are a country. If we keep voting for people on either side who are doing nothing to address the issue, we are signaling that we want these people here. So we all have to bear the cost.