Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's nice to know that America will have a policy similar to the one that turned away 900 Jews who fled Nazi Germany in 1939 on the MS St. Louis, #MAGA

so for how many millennia do we need to accept every single person because we turned them way? btw, weren't they highly educated or something? or are we supposed to give preference to those who have uncle's uncle in the US, the way we do now?

Forever. Those yearning to be free should be welcome not just those who can make the most cash

Anonymous wrote:Hart-Celler was concocted by Zionists to destroy America. It worked better than intended.

We need to force integrate apartheid Israel. If we dismantled apartheid South Africa, which was less racist than is Israel, we can convert Israel in to a country of inclusion.

Why hasn't Israel accepted migrants fleeing oppressive regimes?

Anonymous wrote:Heads up. Steven Miller yelling at the press corps, and completely losing his sh*t at the WH Press conference, live now, because an reporter asked him if this bill was racist.

Like yelling.

Pop popcorn and head on over.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There are a lot of immigrants (3rd world countries) who want to come to US for opportunities. They unfortunately never got the chance to maximize on their potential ie educational, etc. They may not be skilled, etc. as a result. The whole notion of immigration is about seeking a "better life."

I think it's an interesting idea this new immigration policy - not sure how I feel about it yet because yes, intuitively, it makes sense of course for any country to want the "brightest" and "best."

The reality however is that often, immigrants are motivated to make the move - and it's often time a sacrifice of leaving your family, what you know, etc) to want to find something better - exactly because they aren't the brightest or the best but because they recognize if they stayed where they were, they would never have a chance to be. There's talent never realized in so many people.

The other thing is just because someone isn't great on paper does not mean they may not have the motivation to learn and more than anything, are driven to WORK. That's a huge thing - people who are willing to work and start at square 1. Never underestimate the power of desire. My parents worked their asses off and became millionaires in their 40s having immigrated in their 20s here. I know of many such stories of people who started with nothing but after awhile, saw great leaps.

Finally, a very important consideration is also that, even if someone does not look good on paper, their sons/daughters who would become US citizens, while living in US, may become great. And we would never have the opportunity to embrace contributors to American society but for our lack of compassion for their parents or grandparents. You just can't be so black/white on matters concerning people. People are different and people can have kids who are completely different from then - you really have to consider all the possibilities and not look at just the moment. At the heart of the beauty of the American Dream is that you can start anywhere and rise.

I am an immigrant. I read your post and it makes very little sense. You have a lot of maybes and suppositions.

So according to you, we should take in everybody because their sons and daughter MAY become valuable citizens. This does not make any sense to anyone .. what if they become horrible Americans ??

Let's apply the same standards to admission in Harvard for instance. Just because someone's application form does not look good on paper it does not mean they cannot be good students and have fantastic lives. Does that mean Harvard should accept everyone who applies?

I read this post and thought the same thing. Must take everyone because there is a small chance they may be great. Didn't make any sense to me. We need to have regulations in place for immigration. "What may be" is not one of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

As a liberal, when you bring this up - the Latino groups hammer you.

They are fully against Australian/Canadian type systems.

We should be bringing in more Japanese, Koreans, Jews, high IQ northwest Europeans.

Not the dregs

Why would any of these folks who aren't already here, want to come?

What happened to

“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

That's nice you can quote the engraving on the base of the Statue of Liberty.

It fails to explain why our current economy would benefits from more waves of illiterate, impoverished, unskilled teens from primarily 3 countries: El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras - like the waves encouraged under Obama.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What am I missing? They now want to bring in more high skilled workers (which I agree with, BTW).

. . .

In other words, Trump wants to model our immigration laws on those of Canada.

Explain why you hate Canada.

PP on this. And I'm not saying I disagree with this immigration policy. And Canada rocks (Justin Trudeau vs Trump-- no contest). I'm trying just to figure out why Trumpkins are in favor of it after all the hype about how Trump was going to get rid of H1B (high skilled worker) visas. There was a lot of Trump anti H1B rhetoric. Now they want to expand high skilled immigrants.

Why the change?

I’ll speak up as a conservative.
Our country was founded on immigrants. Nothing wrong with immigration. If we are going to accept immigrants, why not accept the best and brightest instead of those who happen to knock on our doors? Lets put some meaningful criteria in place. Immigration is not going to stop. It never was... and we all knew that (despite what the left has been saying). And, since it is not going to stop, let’s make sure those coming can speak English AND support themselves. Pretty simple, really.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's nice to know that America will have a policy similar to the one that turned away 900 Jews who fled Nazi Germany in 1939 on the MS St. Louis, #MAGA

so for how many millennia do we need to accept every single person because we turned them way? btw, weren't they highly educated or something? or are we supposed to give preference to those who have uncle's uncle in the US, the way we do now?

Do not talk what you have no clue about. That tells badly about your intelligence and maybe you deserve to be deported replaced by some smart immigrant.

The immigration policy provides options for parents and siblings of US permanent residents or citizens to immigrate not uncle or uncle's uncle. You need to be permanent resident or citizen to even apply for them NOT just a mere visa holder.

Riiight. Except that a person brings a sibling who brings a spouse who brings a sibling so pretty quickly we have uncles uncle.

Except the waiting period even to get a sibling runs into decades. So your theory of chain migration letting people into this country to the tune of millions is possible if humans live for 200 years.

that is not true. it says in the documents/website it will take 20 years to bring ina sibling on reality it moves faster. not sure why, or maybe those people bring sibling illegally and merely start the paperwork.

You need to be a US citizen to apply for your siblings. You also need to wait 5 years to get citizenship after green card. Uncle's uncle is not coming in 50 years.

uncle's uncle will be here immediately and file his paperwork. my nanny brought half of her village to DC.

You can't file paperwork immediately as a green card holder other than your spouse or minor children. And the wait time is long.

right. but they can come here illegally and then become legal over time.

That's a totally different issue.

I have no idea why Steve Bannon/Miller picked LEGAL immigration issue as the first immigration bill to bring up.

because it's important and most people support merit system.

Anonymous wrote:

uncle's uncle will be here immediately and file his paperwork. my nanny brought half of her village to DC.

I have neighbors who have quite a chain going--remember, the chain expands geometrically. You bring mother and father-in-law and then you have two sets of sibling coming......

And, I'm pretty sure I read or heard somewhere today that family members make up the largest portion of new green cards.

uncle's uncle will be here immediately and file his paperwork. my nanny brought half of her village to DC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's nice to know that America will have a policy similar to the one that turned away 900 Jews who fled Nazi Germany in 1939 on the MS St. Louis, #MAGA

so for how many millennia do we need to accept every single person because we turned them way? btw, weren't they highly educated or something? or are we supposed to give preference to those who have uncle's uncle in the US, the way we do now?

Do not talk what you have no clue about. That tells badly about your intelligence and maybe you deserve to be deported replaced by some smart immigrant.

The immigration policy provides options for parents and siblings of US permanent residents or citizens to immigrate not uncle or uncle's uncle. You need to be permanent resident or citizen to even apply for them NOT just a mere visa holder.

Riiight. Except that a person brings a sibling who brings a spouse who brings a sibling so pretty quickly we have uncles uncle.

Except the waiting period even to get a sibling runs into decades. So your theory of chain migration letting people into this country to the tune of millions is possible if humans live for 200 years.

that is not true. it says in the documents/website it will take 20 years to bring ina sibling on reality it moves faster. not sure why, or maybe those people bring sibling illegally and merely start the paperwork.

You need to be a US citizen to apply for your siblings. You also need to wait 5 years to get citizenship after green card. Uncle's uncle is not coming in 50 years.

uncle's uncle will be here immediately and file his paperwork. my nanny brought half of her village to DC.

You can't file paperwork immediately as a green card holder other than your spouse or minor children. And the wait time is long.

right. but they can come here illegally and then become legal over time.

That's a totally different issue.

I have no idea why Steve Bannon/Miller picked LEGAL immigration issue as the first immigration bill to bring up.

because it's important and most people support merit system.