Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can guarantee you that if Trump decides to use these immigrants as pawns and send them to sanctuary cities, that people like me will be there to welcome them with open arms and help to make them feel like the human beings they are.

Means I'll have less money to send to the aid of those hurt by natural disasters that are plaguing the US in this time of climate change. But oh well. I'm sure Trump will step up to make up for that loss, as long as the residents in states affected promise to vote for him. If they don't, they shouldn't hold their breath.

lol

so sorry you have to choose to which "charity" you'll contribute

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The President is giving you exactly what you said you welcomed. Remember the signs, the sermons we heard, the taxes we pay, the donations we make, the languages we learned, and hours of volunteering we give? Yeah - he's giving us exactly what we encouraged and support. This community can handle the needs far better than most.

+1,000
Don't forget the marches... these immigrants will have the red carpet rolled out for them! I actually think it's a very intriguing idea. Funny how liberals pay lip service to all their "good deed" and virtue signal whenever humanly possible. But when a real opportunity arrives to take in these immigrants, all of a sudden it's "punishment". Too funny.

TRUMP thinks it’s a punishment. Are you really that dense?

Who cares? YOU don't think it's a punishment, right? Or do you? Which is it?

this

It becomes an attack on Trump when he stated the obvious. While ICE isn't going to OFFICIALLY ship newcomers to sanctuary cities, that's where they're headed. Mo Co, for example, is growing in diversity.

Here are some stats:

The population of Montgomery County, MD is 44.5% White, 19.1% Hispanic, and 17.8% Black. 41% of the people in Montgomery County, MD speak a non-English language, and 84.8% are U.S. citizens.

Astute folks notice it in the schools first. Here is a demographic chart of the MCPS schools - https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/annualreport/2017/
Hispanics make up the largest group. Now, you'd need to examine the numbers more closely to see who's in ESOL classes, for example, in order to analyze funding and growth. And those numbers will change from level to level, as there may be more allocated for ES than for HS, for example, depending upon shifts in the population. But we do know that the group is growing, which makes it attractive for those seeking refuge in similar communities.



So while "Trump thinks it's a punishment," as you so eloquently stated, do YOU think it's a punishment, too? That's the question that's been asked again and again on these threads.

The growth is there, folks. Liberal (and mainly coastal) cities will attract newcomers for many reasons. So how is Trump's "punishment" any different from what's ALREADY BEEN in place for YEARS?

I have an issue with his intentions. He intends to punish US citizens. He intends to “stick it to the libs”. It doesn’t matter if it’s actually a punishment or not. The POTUS is looking for ways to punish Dems because they disagreed with ICE funding. This is just one example of his vindictiveness.

His approval in NC is dropping. What if he withholds FEMA funding if they get another massive hurricane over that?

You probably wouldn’t have an issue with that but I would because I don’t think the POTUS should act like a vindictive, hateful a&$hole to any US citizens. But again that’s where we differ. You enjoy any chance to “stick it to the libs”. That is precisely why you put a vindictive, hateful a$$hole in the White House.

Iol

I taught in MCPS for over half of my life. Trump's words have really just brought to light what was ALREADY in place regarding changing demographics and funding. What's vindictive about the truth? Sanctuary cities provide resources for struggling folks, and they can monitor them for criminal behavior.

MCPS didn't view the additional newcomers as "punishment" - at least not when I was around. It did all it could to ensure that ESOL was fully funded. You should know that many who arrive are illiterate. So it's like starting at ground zero - similar instruction to what a preschooler would receive. (We're talking high school here . . . ) Certainly there's a budget for ESOL, but school allocations come in a pot, and it's not unheard of to shuffle funding around if the need is there.

And I didn't put Trump in office. lol - But keep making ASSumptions w/o providing any data. At least I can find credible information for posting. You're just angry and resentful for whatever reason.

Try working in challenging schools first. Then let's see you post something "insightful."

You've been teaching for over half of your life, and you think that qualifies you to spew lies about sanctuary cities? Did you also lie to your students?

Wow. Just wow.

Where's the lie?

You know where the lie is. Don't act coy, that's just another form of dishonesty.

no i dont please point it out.

I am the original teacher who posted the chart. I stand by my post.

?If you're going to call me a liar then point out my lies. There is enough evidence I've provided for your counterclaims. That's how one argues, by the way.

But of course, as another PP said, I'm apparently a crappy teacher.

It was specifically pointed out that you were lying about sanctuary cities. And you know that.

START arguing like an intelligent grown up by pointing out what my "lies" are, genius!

You are lazy as hell - or lying yourself.

I'm out. I have better things to do with my time on a Saturday night.

peace, genius!

Here you complete and utter moron, since you seem incapable of a basic internet search. Talk about lazy as hell. You mis-characterized sanctuary cities. How many ways to you need to be told? You must be the sh*ttiest teacher ever.

Sanctuary cities in the US are about not forcing police to question people about their immigrant status, not to be confused with the usage of sanctuary cities in Europe.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctuary_city

Sanctuary city (French: ville sanctuaire; Spanish: ciudad santuario) refers to municipal jurisdictions, typically in North America and Western Europe, that limit their cooperation with the national government's effort to enforce immigration law. Leaders of sanctuary cities say they want to reduce fear of deportation and possible family break-up among people who are in the country illegally, so that such people will be more willing to report crimes, use health and social services, and enroll their children in school. In the United States, municipal policies include prohibiting police or city employees from questioning people about their immigration status and refusing requests by national immigration authorities to detain people beyond their release date, if they were jailed for breaking local law.[1] Such policies can be set expressly in law (de jure) or observed in practice (de facto), but the designation "sanctuary city" does not have a precise legal definition. The Federation for American Immigration Reform estimated in 2018 that more than 500 U.S. jurisdictions, including states and municipalities, had adopted sanctuary policies.[2]

Studies on the relationship between sanctuary status and crime have found that sanctuary policies either have no effect on crime or that sanctuary cities have lower crime rates and stronger economies than comparable non-sanctuary cities.[3][4][5][6] Opponents of sanctuary cities argue that cities should assist the national government in enforcing immigration law. Supporters of sanctuary cities argue that enforcement of national law is not the duty of localities.[7] Legal opinions vary on whether immigration enforcement by local police is constitutional.[8]

European cities have been inspired by the same political currents of the sanctuary movement as American cities, but the term "sanctuary city" now has different meanings in Europe and North America.[9] In the United Kingdom and Ireland, and in continental Europe, sanctuary city refers to cities that are committed to welcoming refugees, asylum seekers and others who are seeking safety. Such cities are now found in 80 towns, cities and local areas in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.[10] .[11] Glasgow and Swansea have become known as noted sanctuary cities.[10][12][13]
-------------

Now STFU.

DP. If I were a liberal, I would be very upset that you were drawing this clear distinction between what liberal American cities do for illegal immigrants and what Europeans are willing to do.

Sanctuary cities in Europe "are committed to welcoming refugees, asylum seekers and others who are seeking safety" and their emphasis is on "building bridges of connection and understanding, which is done through raising awareness, befriending schemes and forming cultural connections in the arts, sport, health, education, faith groups and other sectors of society"

But American sanctuary cities limit what they're willing to do to "limiting their cooperation with the national government's effort to enforce immigration law."

Wow. The European model started like the American model and grew from there into what seems like an actual compassionate, caring, community building way of life. American liberals, as evidenced repeatedly on this thread, just want illegal immigrants to come into the country and stay here, but don't want to actually do anything to welcome them or to make the communities they live in function effectively.

You should be TRYING to make an American sanctuary city look like the Europeans. Put your money where your mouth is. Find ways to welcome illegal immigrants into your communities and integrate them. Enjoy all the benefits you say it brings. Instead, you're shouting indignantly that people don't understand that calling oneself a sanctuary city doesn't mean what you think it means. You sound proud to say, "Let's be real. It's not REALLY a sanctuary for illegal immigrants."

Even if Trump is trying to "punish" these cities, you could totally own him by calling his bluff and saying, "Bring it." All of a sudden, Democrats don't relish that opportunity?

Anyone care to respond?

Here you go:
The definition of Sanctuary City was provided to point out that the many, many posts of "don't they want them anyway" are ignorant and off-base. So that's the first hole blown through the false narratives of the right-wing PPs on this thread.

Step 2 is that the vast majority of people want anyone who is an immigrant to come into the country through legal means. No one wants undocumented people just dispersed around the country with no plan as to how to support them.

If they have applied for and been granted asylum, then, yes, I'm guessing the people in sanctuary cities would be happy to welcome them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we are to believe that this is a 36 page thread because some are mad that Trump was mean?

What is the difference between this topic and literally every other day?

The issue is that you dont want your schools and neighborhoods going to the crapper. Its okay to admit.

You are projecting, MAGA trash!!

And, phew! Finally! It took 36 pages for you to realize that we are outraged by Trump’s vindictiveness, not the immigrants. Not the brightest bunch, are you?

Oh I dont believe that for a minute since you're not bright enough to catch that.

And again, its not vindictive if its what you're asking for. Some people just search for things to be outraged about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m a Moderate who voted for Hillary, but I think Trump has the right idea.

I am very anti-illegal immigration, and live in a stupidly liberal area of MoCo. Neighbors with signs up everywhere about how ‘We Welcome All Immigrants’ etc, etc.

Maybe Trump could choose each of these houses to accept the illegal immigrants? They are advertising a welcome. Makes perfect sense to me.

+ 1,000,000

You newbies to immigration are hilarious. Grew up in AZ where we dealt with immigrants all the time. In this whole scenario, the only people I fear are the white people deeply scared of poor migrants. The large groups are seeking asylum and are not illegal.

Why did you leave Arizona? Sounds like you were the one who feared poor immigrants and left the state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So we are to believe that this is a 36 page thread because some are mad that Trump was mean?

What is the difference between this topic and literally every other day?

The issue is that you dont want your schools and neighborhoods going to the crapper. Its okay to admit.

You are projecting, MAGA trash!!

And, phew! Finally! It took 36 pages for you to realize that we are outraged by Trump’s vindictiveness, not the immigrants. Not the brightest bunch, are you?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When my oldest (who is turning 30 this month) entered MoCo public schools in the 90's, their national ranking was in the top 10%. When my youngest graduate high school next year, the ranking will be substantially lower. Want to know why?

Wrong thread, Gramps.

Brought to you by the same party that coined the phrase "when they go low, we go high"

Anonymous wrote:

Where did OP say she doesn’t want immigrants sent to blue areas? She’s talking about Trump’s behavior.

This is has been copied and pasted before.

from OP's post

Trump wants to use the apprehended immigrants as if they are wild animals to release them in "sanctuary cities" to punish Democrats and blue states!!! WTF!

OP is taking liberties with Trump's wording. OK, Trump used the word, animals, in regard to MS 13 (he claimed). People didn't believe him, as they claimed he used the term to describe ALL migrants. fine . . . (I'm not a Trump supporter, but I do look at the hypocrisy stemming from both sides.)

So OP then used some charged language - the use of "wild animals" and "punish."

OP "softened" the blow by inserting "as if," which isn't a direct comparison. But the comparison is there nonetheless.

So on a psychological level, OP is indeed characterizing these folks as animals who will punish all the liberals. But OP deflects by blaming Trump.

A truly compassionate liberal would have questioned Trump's motives w/o using harsh word choice.

And let's just call a spade a spade, folks. The point of sanctuary cities was to allow illegal immigrants to feel comfortable around police (and other service workers) w/o fear of some sort of retribution. So of course these welcoming environments would be number one choices in relocation efforts.

I was called a liar b/c of something I apparently said about sanctuary cities - but was never given the specifics. (I was only attacked, which isn't a way to argue.) Therefore, I'm addressing this topic here, as it's fitting.

Anonymous wrote:So we are to believe that this is a 36 page thread because some are mad that Trump was mean?

What is the difference between this topic and literally every other day?

The issue is that you dont want your schools and neighborhoods going to the crapper. Its okay to admit.

Anonymous wrote:I can guarantee you that if Trump decides to use these immigrants as pawns and send them to sanctuary cities, that people like me will be there to welcome them with open arms and help to make them feel like the human beings they are.

Means I'll have less money to send to the aid of those hurt by natural disasters that are plaguing the US in this time of climate change. But oh well. I'm sure Trump will step up to make up for that loss, as long as the residents in states affected promise to vote for him. If they don't, they shouldn't hold their breath.

Anonymous wrote:I can guarantee you that if Trump decides to use these immigrants as pawns and send them to sanctuary cities, that people like me will be there to welcome them with open arms and help to make them feel like the human beings they are.

Means I'll have less money to send to the aid of those hurt by natural disasters that are plaguing the US in this time of climate change. But oh well. I'm sure Trump will step up to make up for that loss, as long as the residents in states affected promise to vote for him. If they don't, they shouldn't hold their breath.

Anonymous wrote:This thread is ridiculous. Bunch of right-wingers posting the same false propaganda again and again...the same old GOP trope that "maybe if I repeat the lie over and over, it will become true".

The definition of a sanctuary city is posted up-thread. It's about *asking* about immigration status for people that already live there, not rolling out the red carpet for illegal immigrants. THEREFORE, every PP making a stupid remark about "don't they want them anyway" is barking up the wrong tree due to ignorance of what a sanctuary city is. If you want to have a discussion of who should welcome legal immigrants, have that discussion, but stop mischaracterizing sanctuary cities to spread a false narrative.

NOBODY wants open borders. Stop pretending this is a mainstream Democrat sentiment, when it is just a lie to serve your twisted narrative.

The vast majority of Democrats want LEGAL immigration. They are concerned about the HUMANITARIAN crisis at the border, because we are ill equipped to deal with a large number of people seeking ASYLUM. The vast majority of Democrats are not advocating just letting people in the country illegally. But they are saying we need to treat human beings like HUMAN BEINGS, not demonize them.

Right-winger fear-mongers are the worst. You preach fear and hatred and then try to twist it around and blame it on others. Vile.

This.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When my oldest (who is turning 30 this month) entered MoCo public schools in the 90's, their national ranking was in the top 10%. When my youngest graduate high school next year, the ranking will be substantially lower. Want to know why?

Wrong thread, Gramps.