Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about birthright citizenship? I knew a family who had at least 10 tourist visa visitors give birth.

There are also birthright tourism companies that bring an illegal to the states in her 9th month, she gives birth to an anchor baby, and then they both go home. Now if things go south for the family, he's a U.S. citizen and moves back here to get welfare benefits, food stamps, etc. It's almost like an insurance policy.

Where did all you weird ass, staunch conservatives come from? I know you all like simplistic answers for complex issues. It's evident in your posts. But are you idiots even posting from dc? This is a forum for dc urban moms and dads. People who aren't flyover state rubes. Are you those people? Are you posting from a sh*tty state where your stupid arguments hold water? You'd get laughed out of the beltway if you actually lived in dc.

How are we going to pay for it?

Anonymous wrote:A 70 point immigration plan. FFS. Laws about complex issues are complex. I mean-- Trumps haven't been. But in the real government they are. But only Trump would want to make sure he got credit for coming up with 70 points (not 68!!!!!).

It's been the same for his transportation and infrastructure plans. Write a bunch of f*cking policy points in a few pages then hand it off to Congress to somehow hammer out a coherent bill. It's an absurd way to do things.

Anonymous wrote:What about birthright citizenship? I knew a family who had at least 10 tourist visa visitors give birth.

There are also birthright tourism companies that bring an illegal to the states in her 9th month, she gives birth to an anchor baby, and then they both go home. Now if things go south for the family, he's a U.S. citizen and moves back here to get welfare benefits, food stamps, etc. It's almost like an insurance policy.

A 70 point immigration plan. FFS. Laws about complex issues are complex. I mean-- Trumps haven't been. But in the real government they are. But only Trump would want to make sure he got credit for coming up with 70 points (not 68!!!!!).

Anonymous wrote:If Trump sticks to his guns on this issue, even if nothing passes, he will come out ahead. He can say that he could not get it through because of the Democrats and some Republicans.

This is a major area of vulnerability for Democrats and they are caught between a rock and a hard place: they can't alienate the Hispanic lobby by giving in to Trump's demands and at the same time they know that middle America resents illegal immigration and Democrats are the ones championing amnesty for illegals.

Not necessarily. From what I've heard, LEGAL Latino immigrants are resentful toward the illegals, and understandably so.

What about birthright citizenship? I knew a family who had at least 10 tourist visa visitors give birth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: in immigration were done long ago. Everything else is hard.

More ICE agents? What a joke. That's going to make the problem worse. The backlog in immigration courts is up to four years already. How about fixing the court system instead of the police system. Most of the people here are hard to deport because they have deep family ties and are part of the fabric of American life. Many families consist of mixed immigration status. Are you going to deport mom and leave the US citizen kids? Is that good for America.

Sorry my simple-minded friend. Immigration is hard. Don't fall for the siren song of easy solutions, which is not serious policy, but red meat for the base.

It is not complicated: they are here illegally and have no right to be here. Mass deportation is not the answer but judicious enforcement will work.

Never forget that no matter how long ago they came here, they did so illegally.

Exactly. A young woman crosses the border the week brfore she gives birth, pushes out an anchor baby, and now the libs are crying about "how can you send back a mother and separate her from her U.S. citizen child? Easy. If she tows the line, she stays. If she gets multiple DWIs, she gets deported - and her child can go with her.

The USA should have separate policies on DACA for visa overstayers -ALL GO BACK.

Anonymous wrote:The sick part of this is that op, and trump supporting ilk, don't see any qualms leveraging kids' futures to pass border wall funding. These daca kids have been here since they were babies. How is it fair to tie their fate to this? That shows a lack of decency. Explain that. Then also explain how taxpayers are supposed to pay billions for a wall that trump promised Mexico would pay for? You people are clueless and, yes, "hateful".

These DACA "kids" did not have to be here since they were babies. DACA was for those present in the USA between by June 15, 2007 [less than age 16 upon entrance so under 16 at 12:01 am on 6/15/07] and continuously present in the USA until June 15, 2012. How many used real ages? Note while DCUM mom crowd is prone to redshirting others send them as early as possible.

The oldest DACA would now be 31 and the youngest 10 but they could not apply until age 15. DACA's and their illegal parents have produced anchors.

How is it hateful to expect reasonable application of my country's laws? Reagan's amnesty created a flood since the USA did not follow through with expected border enforcement and e verify. DACA created a flood. Obama's unaccompanied minors [teens and who knows how old many really are? ] totaled 132,573 between Oct 2013 and Jan 2017.

Hateful country? Prejudiced? Excuse but what language do Puerto Ricans speak in PR? What people in a territory have free access to USA and all rights as citizens in the 50 states?

Anonymous wrote:
The only thing I noticed was liberals complaining that I and other Conservatives are bigoted against "brown" people, as is their normal M.O., or complaining in general terms that they don't like getting control of illegal aliens or modifying the wide-open attitude that everyone has to be accepted to the country. I haven't seen people refute, for example, the points I mentioned above as no-brainers. Unless you WANT emoloyers to hire illegals over Americans, protect the gang members and drunk drivers, and look the other way when deportees sneak back five times?

Please work on your noticing skills. At least start reading some of the news media the president calls "fake news", "lying", "failing", etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: in immigration were done long ago. Everything else is hard.

More ICE agents? What a joke. That's going to make the problem worse. The backlog in immigration courts is up to four years already. How about fixing the court system instead of the police system. Most of the people here are hard to deport because they have deep family ties and are part of the fabric of American life. Many families consist of mixed immigration status. Are you going to deport mom and leave the US citizen kids? Is that good for America.

Sorry my simple-minded friend. Immigration is hard. Don't fall for the siren song of easy solutions, which is not serious policy, but red meat for the base.

It is not complicated: they are here illegally and have no right to be here. Mass deportation is not the answer but judicious enforcement will work.

Never forget that no matter how long ago they came here, they did so illegally.

Actually lots of them came here legally, then overstayed their visas. So, using your language, they are now here illegally, but they did not come here illegally.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a bill OP. Just a vague plan. Trump doesn't do policy. He's an impotent President.

So what are the rumors about him and Hope Hicks if he is impotent?

His viagra is still covered under the ACA, even though my BC is not. Priorities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yay now there will be even more harassment of Latinos, even the ines here legally and ones who were born here. All because everyone is a coward and won't go after business owners who hire them.

Tell me where to report my neighbor who isn't paying taxes on her cleaning lady. NoVa.

Is the person hired by the hour once per week? When I hire a housekeeping or landscaping company to mow my yard once per week, I cut a check and THEY have to declare the income on THEIR company taxes. I can't DEDUCT the cost of cleaning or landscaping on MY taxes unless I'm renting the home out as a business.

I'm confused by your statement.

Don't be ridiculous. I said it's a "cleaning lady", NOT a company. So she doesn't have independent contractor status, but nice try.

Employment lawyer here. An individual can be an independent contractor. You should know this. Professionals do this all the time. There is a multiprong test about IC vs employee for individuals. Does she bring her own supplies. Who control when she comes. Etc. if it is an employee, you start owing taxes at $2000. An independent contractor pays self employment no matter how much they make, and whether they work for one person or 60.

The President is a f**king moron.

xoxo,
Rex