Shut her down boys, shut her down.

[Kutnupe14]

Well in not so many words...exactly what I meant.

It's certainly better explained. This shutdown, over a Trump's wall, isn't about Latino votes. I'm not Latino, and I don't support the wall. I also live in "middle America," and don't support the those that want a wall erected; so I can only assume that when you made reference to "middle America," - noting it was quoted, you didn't have the entirety of all the persons living in Middle America. There's no reason to cite race/ethnicity, over an issue that goes well further than such.

 

[jamil]

I think the first quote is speaking to the Democrat's arguable tendency of favoring porous borders to pander to a certain demographic and hope to convert a non-zero percentage of those who achieve citizenship to the democratic fold. It is not an uncommon nor extreme viewpoint to believe that at heart the Democrats care little for the people caught up in their plans nor the Americans harmed by the same, so long as they achieve power. They are widely held to be the party of "by any means necessary" I would expect "going the distance for the Latino vote" could refer to their open borders at all costs stratyegy

When the OP speaks of the Republicans "going the distance for the middle America vote" I interpret it as doing whatever it takes to get control of the border and bring some semblance of rationality to immigration. I infer the writer would prefer emigres that are committed to the idea of America and becoming Americans not those solely committed to the idea of profiting off America while becoming La Raza Unida members

I get no read from the OP that says "keep all the brown people out". I just hear another voice raised against people storming our border demanding we take them in. Not nearly as many people as you imagine are for closed borders, they are for the creation of new Americans. Assimilation should not be a dirty word nor fail to be required of any who wish to be awarded citizenship. Anything else is self-destructive

In the other post, I see innuendo used to suggest dark undercurrents but still haven't seen that OP post up the evidence (or lack thereof) he was called out on

Cue the usual krewe to come and grab an oar

Yeah, but the "porous border" policy is about wooing a particular identity group against republicans so that they can gain political dominance, which will enable them to form Utopian America, once and for all. Or turn it into a cash cow like the EU. Either way.

I kinda doubt they actually give a flying **** about Latinos. They're all just identity groups to pit against their ideological foes.

 

[jamil]

It's certainly better explained. This shutdown, over a Trump's wall, isn't about Latino votes. I'm not Latino, and I don't support the wall. I also live in "middle America," and don't support the those that want a wall erected; so I can only assume that when you made reference to "middle America," - noting it was quoted, you didn't have the entirety of all the persons living in Middle America. There's no reason to cite race/ethnicity, over an issue that goes well further than such.

Middle America isn't exactly a monolith. Maybe you're reading too much into punctuation.

By the way. Why don't you support the wall? I am mostly ambivalent about it. I'm tired of the political posturing and lies and manipulation. I think in this case Trump is being more transparent about his motivations than the Democrats are. Their posturing makes it apparent that they're just trying to damage the Republican brand (not that Trump doesn't help with that) for 2020. They don't give a **** about a ***damn wall. The **** they give is more about making Trump look bad for wanting the wall, and making Trump look bad for shutting down the government. The party of the people my ass. And yeah, it is partly about the Latino vote. Why are they wedging it so hard if it isn't?

But anyway, curious about why you're against the wall.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Middle America isn't exactly a monolith. Maybe you're reading too much into punctuation.

By the way. Why don't you support the wall? I am mostly ambivalent about it. I'm tired of the political posturing and lies and manipulation. I think in this case Trump is being more transparent about his motivations than the Democrats are. Their posturing makes it apparent that they're just trying to damage the Republican brand (not that Trump doesn't help with that) for 2020. They don't give a **** about a ***damn wall. The **** they give is more about making Trump look bad for wanting the wall, and making Trump look bad for shutting down the government. The party of the people my ass. And yeah, it is partly about the Latino vote. Why are they wedging it so hard if it isn't?

But anyway, curious about why you're against the wall.

It's a waste of money. Most illegals come here legally. An unmanned, unmonitored wall (cause CBP doesn't have nearly enough manpower), is nothing more than a speedbump on your way to gaining entry into the United States. The money would be better spent aggressively prosecuting people that entice, and hire illegals.

 

[mmpsteve]

It's a waste of money. Most illegals come here legally. An unmanned, unmonitored wall (cause CBP doesn't have nearly enough manpower), is nothing more than a speedbump on your way to gaining entry into the United States. The money would be better spent aggressively prosecuting people that entice, and hire illegals.

Then maybe we should fully fund CBP with enough manpower and tech power, AND A WALL, and get the job done? Call me crazy, but the long term cost savings might equal out, over time, and we'd have border security as a 'bonus'.

P.s.: how do most 'illegals', in your words, come here Legally, and why is that not inherrantly false?

.

 

[ghitch75]

if you are not for the wall then you must do this.......period.....

 

[KG1]

The wall represents a stiff physical barrier that prevents the Left from achieving their political goals. It's not about the money.

 

[PaulF]

Middle America isn't exactly a monolith. Maybe you're reading too much into punctuation.

By the way. Why don't you support the wall? I am mostly ambivalent about it. I'm tired of the political posturing and lies and manipulation. I think in this case Trump is being more transparent about his motivations than the Democrats are. Their posturing makes it apparent that they're just trying to damage the Republican brand (not that Trump doesn't help with that) for 2020. They don't give a **** about a ***damn wall. The **** they give is more about making Trump look bad for wanting the wall, and making Trump look bad for shutting down the government. The party of the people my ass. And yeah, it is partly about the Latino vote. Why are they wedging it so hard if it isn't?

But anyway, curious about why you're against the wall.

It doesn't address the problem(s) associated with the movement of undocumented people and goods across our border, and (to me) that makes it a little more than boondoggle.

We need to address the realities of the situation, decide what is lacking in our current scheme, and devise a path toward a more effective set of policies. Right now we (writ large) cannot even agree on what the problem is.

-Do we want to keep our food production costs low, or do we want to pay more for hand-picked produce? The status quo involves huge numbers of people temporarily moving across both international and state borders...and then back. Should we have a system that allows people to legally cross the border for seasonal work...or to we block them out and raise the effective cost of that labor? In the end the consumer pays the price.

-Do we want to address the American love affair with drugs? We fund the cartels, and we can stop...but our government has contracts to fulfill at their legion of private-run prisons, and the money flows freely from private donor to public servant.

-Do we still want the best and brightest the world has to offer? Since WWII we have drawn the top academic, economic, engineering, and business minds from around the globe. The immigrants that come here aren't lazy...the lazy stay home.

Most immigrants aren't criminals (beyond illegal entry), and we have plenty of law enforcement to deal with those that are. Some of these people want to work and go home...we should let them. Some of these people want to become American...that's a beautiful thing, and we should welcome them. Some of these people want to take advantage of our ridiculous drug and prostitution laws, and they feed on our most vulnerable...those people should be dealt with by the justice system.

Right now in Gainesville Georgia there are several giant chicken processing plants that desperately need workers, but they are in direct competition with Chinese producers...so they need to keep production costs low if they want to produce chicken in the US, under direct supervision. Those factories import illegal workers by the thousands in a sick revolving door-like scheme. Most of those people come here thinking they are getting a legitimate shot at an American life. They want to buy houses and raise their children here. They arrive to find they are little more than slaves.

There has to be a better, more transparent, more productive way to deal with this problem than security theatre. Lets' be honest...that's all border walls have ever been.

 

[trailrider]

It's certainly better explained. This shutdown, over a Trump's wall, isn't about Latino votes. I'm not Latino, and I don't support the wall. I also live in "middle America," and don't support the those that want a wall erected; so I can only assume that when you made reference to "middle America," - noting it was quoted, you didn't have the entirety of all the persons living in Middle America. There's no reason to cite race/ethnicity, over an issue that goes well further than such.

You state that as fact, when in fact it is opinion. What is this shutdown about, in your opinion?

To clear up my interpretation of middle America(notice this time I didn't use quotes), I'm referring to the majority of states between the coasts that voted for Trump based on campaign promises. One of which was building a wall to keep out illegal immigrants, criminals, terrorists, drugs, etc.

 

[amboy49]

It's a waste of money. Most illegals come here legally. An unmanned, unmonitored wall (cause CBP doesn't have nearly enough manpower), is nothing more than a speedbump on your way to gaining entry into the United States. The money would be better spent aggressively prosecuting people that entice, and hire illegals.

I read and reread and reread your statement that “Most illegals come here legally” trying to understand what the hell you said. I thought surely you left out a word. That is the simplest sentence which makes absolutely NO SENSE ! It’s like saying day is night and black is white. I’ve often read many of your posts and either didn’t agree with your premise or couldn’t follow the logic, but this is a new high.

If you would be so inclined, could you please explain that sentence.

 

[BigRed]

The "ignore" feature is an excellent tool for not being bothered by dicks and asshattery.

 

[jamil]

It doesn't address the problem(s) associated with the movement of undocumented people and goods across our border, and (to me) that makes it a little more than boondoggle.

We need to address the realities of the situation, decide what is lacking in our current scheme, and devise a path toward a more effective set of policies. Right now we (writ large) cannot even agree on what the problem is.

-Do we want to keep our food production costs low, or do we want to pay more for hand-picked produce? The status quo involves huge numbers of people temporarily moving across both international and state borders...and then back. Should we have a system that allows people to legally cross the border for seasonal work...or to we block them out and raise the effective cost of that labor? In the end the consumer pays the price.

-Do we want to address the American love affair with drugs? We fund the cartels, and we can stop...but our government has contracts to fulfill at their legion of private-run prisons, and the money flows freely from private donor to public servant.

-Do we still want the best and brightest the world has to offer? Since WWII we have drawn the top academic, economic, engineering, and business minds from around the globe. The immigrants that come here aren't lazy...the lazy stay home.

Most immigrants aren't criminals (beyond illegal entry), and we have plenty of law enforcement to deal with those that are. Some of these people want to work and go home...we should let them. Some of these people want to become American...that's a beautiful thing, and we should welcome them. Some of these people want to take advantage of our ridiculous drug and prostitution laws, and they feed on our most vulnerable...those people should be dealt with by the justice system.

Right now in Gainesville Georgia there are several giant chicken processing plants that desperately need workers, but they are in direct competition with Chinese producers...so they need to keep production costs low if they want to produce chicken in the US, under direct supervision. Those factories import illegal workers by the thousands in a sick revolving door-like scheme. Most of those people come here thinking they are getting a legitimate shot at an American life. They want to buy houses and raise their children here. They arrive to find they are little more than slaves.

There has to be a better, more transparent, more productive way to deal with this problem than security theatre. Lets' be honest...that's all border walls have ever been.

I think anlot of Republicans in congress support the wall because it’s a virtu-signal to the base without actually solving the problem. They don’t want to solve the problem because illegal workers are cheeper than legal ones. It doesn’t appear to me that Democrats want to solve the problem either, but for different reasons. It doesn’t get somved because no one wants a solution that works. E-verify might just be disastrously effective.

 

[BugI02]

I read and reread and reread your statement that “Most illegals come here legally” trying to understand what the hell you said. I thought surely you left out a word. That is the simplest sentence which makes absolutely NO SENSE ! It’s like saying day is night and black is white. I’ve often read many of your posts and either didn’t agree with your premise or couldn’t follow the logic, but this is a new high.

If you would be so inclined, could you please explain that sentence.

One possible interpretation that comes to mind is people who overstay their visa. They were not illegal when they arrived, they only became so when the opted to overstay their legal interlude within our shores

 

[Kutnupe14]

I read and reread and reread your statement that “Most illegals come here legally” trying to understand what the hell you said. I thought surely you left out a word. That is the simplest sentence which makes absolutely NO SENSE ! It’s like saying day is night and black is white. I’ve often read many of your posts and either didn’t agree with your premise or couldn’t follow the logic, but this is a new high.

If you would be so inclined, could you please explain that sentence.

How about I give you a situation, and maybe that will clear it up for you:
-government gives a person in a foreign nation a work visa...
-that person enters the United States, legally...
-That person overstays their work visa, by not returning to their home nation when they are supposed to
-That person is now here illegally


Still not following?

 

[BugI02]

I think anlot of Republicans in congress support the wall because it’s a virtu-signal to the base without actually solving the problem. They don’t want to solve the problem because illegal workers are cheeper than legal ones. It doesn’t appear to me that Democrats want to solve the problem either, but for different reasons. It doesn’t get somved because no one wants a solution that works. E-verify might just be disastrously effective.

D'Accord

The call for a perfect or for a 'more' perfect solution is actually a call for delay in addressing the problem. Cost benefit analysis is simply another canard. Politicians who are willing to waste billions and do irreparable harm to our economy just to virtue signal on 'climate change' are not interested in efficiency, they're interested in pandering

If a simple engineering challenge like building a wall sets the stage for this level of battle, what chance do we think structural changes in birthright citizenship or deterring drug importation or guest worker programs have of surviving or being enacted? In light of a rational analysis of the chances of that, Paul, what would you expect the likely outcome to be? And by advocating not doing something possible because (IYO) it would be a waste of money, are you not advocating for the outcome of doing nothing?

Additionally, do I detect the old 'legalize it' mantra embedded in your point about defunding the cartels? I'm not sure I can envision you advocating government action to further discourage the use of drugs. Do people really think of this fight solely as more leverage to get their weed, rather than something existential to the survival of America as we know and/or envision it?

 

[amboy49]

Okay, somewhat clearer now, up to a point. It doesn’t however, speak to the mindset of someone doing something illegally. Using your example they knew there was an expiration date on their visa. Regardles, they know they are breaking the law just the same as crossing the border illegally. I would submit both do so with the intent of gaining entry by circumventing the law(s).

I don't disagree entirely that those who knowing employ illegal aliens ( not undocumented immigrants ) should face stiff penalties. However, reducing the number of illegals to hire will also reduce the resulting huge pool of illegal workers. Perhaps the wall isnÂ’t the perfect answer. Maybe it’s one of a combination on several things. What is being done sure ain’t work’in.

One suggestion I would make, following along your line of logic, is to arrest, charge, prosecute, incarcerate and fine those political figures in power who create “sanctuary” cities and instruct their law enforcement agencies NOT to participate in efforts to eliminate illegals. Perhaps that’s a better place to start than with employers. Unless, of course, you believe every business should be punished for oppressing the masses. I guess I ain’t quite buying the “Grapes of wrath” premise.

 

[KG1]

A border wall done properly (not cheap chicken wire fencing or poorly designed wall sections that the Democrats consider adequate) is a solid physical barrier that can control the flow of all things illegal. Secure the border then we can start getting legitimately serious about addressing other avenues of immigration reform and enforcement without partisan politicking.

Oh nevermind. Who the hell am I kidding. Neither one of those things will ever happen.

 

[ghitch75]

I read and reread and reread your statement that “Most illegals come here legally” trying to understand what the hell you said. I thought surely you left out a word. That is the simplest sentence which makes absolutely NO SENSE ! It’s like saying day is night and black is white. I’ve often read many of your posts and either didn’t agree with your premise or couldn’t follow the logic, but this is a new high.

If you would be so inclined, could you please explain that sentence.

it is called liberal science...

 

[jamil]

It doesn't address the problem(s) associated with the movement of undocumented people and goods across our border, and (to me) that makes it a little more than boondoggle.

We need to address the realities of the situation, decide what is lacking in our current scheme, and devise a path toward a more effective set of policies. Right now we (writ large) cannot even agree on what the problem is.

-Do we want to keep our food production costs low, or do we want to pay more for hand-picked produce? The status quo involves huge numbers of people temporarily moving across both international and state borders...and then back. Should we have a system that allows people to legally cross the border for seasonal work...or to we block them out and raise the effective cost of that labor? In the end the consumer pays the price.

-Do we want to address the American love affair with drugs? We fund the cartels, and we can stop...but our government has contracts to fulfill at their legion of private-run prisons, and the money flows freely from private donor to public servant.

-Do we still want the best and brightest the world has to offer? Since WWII we have drawn the top academic, economic, engineering, and business minds from around the globe. The immigrants that come here aren't lazy...the lazy stay home.

Most immigrants aren't criminals (beyond illegal entry), and we have plenty of law enforcement to deal with those that are. Some of these people want to work and go home...we should let them. Some of these people want to become American...that's a beautiful thing, and we should welcome them. Some of these people want to take advantage of our ridiculous drug and prostitution laws, and they feed on our most vulnerable...those people should be dealt with by the justice system.

Right now in Gainesville Georgia there are several giant chicken processing plants that desperately need workers, but they are in direct competition with Chinese producers...so they need to keep production costs low if they want to produce chicken in the US, under direct supervision. Those factories import illegal workers by the thousands in a sick revolving door-like scheme. Most of those people come here thinking they are getting a legitimate shot at an American life. They want to buy houses and raise their children here. They arrive to find they are little more than slaves.

There has to be a better, more transparent, more productive way to deal with this problem than security theatre. Lets' be honest...that's all border walls have ever been.

I forgot to address the “private prisons” nonsense. C’m Man. That’s ideological rhetoric. They had prison overcrowding long before we had privatized prisons. We had a drug war long befor that too. Private prisons did not create the current situation. It’s the other way around. You have your cause/effect backwards it seems.

 

[mmpsteve]

It's a waste of money. Most illegals come here legally. An unmanned, unmonitored wall (cause CBP doesn't have nearly enough manpower), is nothing more than a speedbump on your way to gaining entry into the United States. The money would be better spent aggressively prosecuting people that entice, and hire illegals.

Not even true. About half of illegals overstayed visas. The rest ... well you know already. Speedbumps have their place, and little ones are not as effective.

.