The President Trump Immigration Thread

[SheepDog4Life]

Homeland Security has rescinded DAPA, which protected parents with US citizen or permanent resident children from deportation.

Trump -5

This is not even a half measure as Obama's DAPA program was halted by the courts almost immediately and has been under injunction since. So this does very little other than halt the appeals.

While I do not think that we should renege on promises already made, and should "grandfather" those young people who already have DACA deferment as long as they keep their end of the deal, I do believe that issuing newly-minted DACA deferments should halt for new arrivals... continuing to do so only encourages, acts as a magnet, for perilous journeys over our Southern border by minors.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Ah, poor poor Trump.

Frankly to me this kind of logic sounds like the little kid in kindergarten that tries to make excuses for not tieing his own shoes or the first grader that tries to blame the dog for eating his homework. Neither of which take responsibility for their own actions. However with a bit of patience, nurturing, and maturity the little kid no longer makes these weak a** excuses and gets off his butt and takes responsibility for his own actions.

So either Trump is or Trump is not capable of taking responsibility for his own actions. Which is it?

Taking responsibility for one's own actions, something of importance that I have no intention of minimizing, only works when one is judged based on those actions rather than on who he is. When he is judged such that whatever he does is going to be held up as 'wrong' because he is Trump, he really doesn't have a choice to stop being Donald Trump. Personally, when I had to deal with this in a job I had back when, I just started doing whatever the hell I felt like because whatever I did necessarily would be wrong because I did it, even if it was exactly what I was told, no matter how self-defeating that may be (i.e., I was assigned blame for the bad results of following faulty instructions to the letter, or alternately, for not following them and getting good results). I understand well this situation in which a person can't win on account of personal identity rather than being judged on his actions or the results thereof. I have no question that where both the Democratic Party and the media are concerned, Trump is now in this position. He attacked the swamp and the swamp is striking back hard.

 

[Dddrees]

Taking responsibility for one's own actions, something of importance that I have no intention of minimizing, only works when one is judged based on those actions rather than on who he is. When he is judged such that whatever he does is going to be held up as 'wrong' because he is Trump, he really doesn't have a choice to stop being Donald Trump. Personally, when I had to deal with this in a job I had back when, I just started doing whatever the hell I felt like because whatever I did necessarily would be wrong because I did it, even if it was exactly what I was told, no matter how self-defeating that may be (i.e., I was assigned blame for the bad results of following faulty instructions to the letter, or alternately, for not following them and getting good results). I understand well this situation in which a person can't win on account of personal identity rather than being judged on his actions or the results thereof. I have no question that where both the Democratic Party and the media are concerned, Trump is now in this position. He attacked the swamp and the swamp is striking back hard.

Sorry, some may see it this way but others see some of his actions as being abhorrent and in some cases absolutely wrong no matter who he or his folllowers see him as being.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Sorry, some may see it this way but others see some of his actions as being abhorrent and absolutely wrong in some cases no matter who he or his folllowers see him as being.

Let's see...

The media/D party see everything he does as wrong regardless of the legality or the wisdom of the action. Case in point, I fail to see any legal argument for stopping him from suspending the admission of persons from countries which offer no means of determining the integrity or even the identity of those persons. Federal law authorizes him to do so and foreign nationals have no legal standing to be entitled to entry, yet we have had the same sh*tstorm twice now. Had he backed down, the same people have demonstrated that they would just as happily point and scream that he 'lied' while campaigning.

I also understand that we have a significant plurality of people who would gladly be rid of the encumbrance we know as the Constitution so long as they are free to bugger billy goats. The whole idea of 'making America great again' implies returning to traditional values which are unlikely to be friendly to such shenanigans, or to any manifestations of socialism/communism.

I understand that some people never want to outgrow mom's basement or some parallel thereof. Again, Trump's vision isn't for them.

I understand that some people hate everything about the republic and would prefer to go down the road that leads to Venezuela/Congo/USSR/North Korea. Trump isn't for them.

 

[jamil]

Sorry, some may see it this way but others see some of his actions as being abhorrent and absolutely wrong in some cases no matter who he or his folllowers see him as being.

The key word is "some". Not all. But Trump is treated as if it is all. While I agree it's fair to criticize his legitimate failings as a president and human being, the hyperbolic trolling by the media and opposing zealots is ridiculous. It is what it is. He's the president. Let him lead, all the while it's fair to level legitimate and proportional criticism.

in other words not everything is a 11.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The key word is "some". Not all. But Trump is treated as if it is all. While I agree it's fair to criticize his legitimate failings as a president and human being, the hyperbolic trolling by the media and opposing zealots is ridiculous. It is what it is. He's the president. Let him lead, all the while it's fair to level legitimate and proportional criticism.

in other words not everything is a 11.

 

[Dddrees]

Let's see...

The media/D party see everything he does as wrong regardless of the legality or the wisdom of the action. Case in point, I fail to see any legal argument for stopping him from suspending the admission of persons from countries which offer no means of determining the integrity or even the identity of those persons. Federal law authorizes him to do so and foreign nationals have no legal standing to be entitled to entry, yet we have had the same sh*tstorm twice now. Had he backed down, the same people have demonstrated that they would just as happily point and scream that he 'lied' while campaigning.

I also understand that we have a significant plurality of people who would gladly be rid of the encumbrance we know as the Constitution so long as they are free to bugger billy goats. The whole idea of 'making America great again' implies returning to traditional values which are unlikely to be friendly to such shenanigans, or to any manifestations of socialism/communism.

I understand that some people never want to outgrow mom's basement or some parallel thereof. Again, Trump's vision isn't for them.

I understand that some people hate everything about the republic and would prefer to go down the road that leads to Venezuela/Congo/USSR/North Korea. Trump isn't for them.

Oh no doubt, I'll be honest I don't like a number of things he does for the simple fact I don't like him. I'm Dan and I'm a NEVER Trumper.

But also understand there are a number of things I find which I believe where the actions themselves no matter who he is Trump or not too be wrong. So it's not just that he says things that p*** me off to no end and I find extremely distatasteful like his POW remark or the fact that he makes outrageous unbelievable statements like Mexico will pay for the wall. I mean the list goes on...

H*** yesterday I found myself saying what the H*** is he doing with regards to the Cuba policy How and the H*** can he do that he's only doing it because he's reversing an Obama policy. Although this may actually be true because I've rarely seen where he seems to display viable knowledege on anything. The fact is in this case I lack enough knowledge to have even formed an opinion on what I believe is the best way to handle this. Although from the little I know it seems as Cuba is one of if not only places we are taking this kind of approach. So yes this is but one instance where I take the opposite just because it's Trump.

I admit it I have a very strong bias when it comes to Trump.

However there are numerous and substantial areas where it wouldn't matter who he was. So for anyone to say it's your bias that totally clouds your vision, I would have to tell you just don't get it. Your wrong if you think that's all there is to it. No, I actually find a lot of what he does and says as being wrong even before we find out it was Trump who did or said it.

 

[jamil]

If you're a realist at all you should seek out all personal biases and account for them when deciding things. Do you want to decide on the basis of what is real, or just what makes you feel better? You can take the red pill or the blue one. Your choice.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Oh no doubt, I'll be honest I don't like a number of things he does for the simple fact I don't like him. I'm Dan and I'm a NEVER Trumper.

But also understand there are a number of things I find which I believe where the actions themselves no matter who he is Trump or not too be wrong. So it's not just that he says things that p*** me off to no end and I find extremely distatasteful like his POW remark or the fact that he makes outrageous unbelievable statements like Mexico will pay for the wall. I mean the list goes on...

H*** yesterday I found myself saying what the H*** is he doing with regards to the Cuba policy How and the H*** can he do that he's only doing it because he's reversing an Obama policy. Although this may actually be true because I've rarely seen where he seems to display viable knowledege on anything. The fact is in this case I lack enough knowledge to have even formed an opinion on what I believe is the best way to handle this. Although from the little I know it seems as Cuba is one of if not only places we are taking this kind of approach. So yes this is but one instance where I take the opposite just because it's Trump.

I admit it I have a very strong bias when it comes to Trump.

However there are numerous and substantial areas where it wouldn't matter who he was. So for anyone to say it's your bias that totally clouds your vision, I would have to tell you just don't get it. Your wrong if you think that's all there is to it. No, I actually find a lot of what he does and says as being wrong even before we find out it was Trump who did or said it.

I have no doubt that you personally are acting on largely objective measurement with some bias attached. My point is that the talking heads are acting strictly on bias.

I will also say that Trump would not have been my first choice. Give the opportunity to wave the magic wand, Rand Paul would have been my pick. That said, for all his flaws, Trump is the only candidate who actually got traction that has any problem with the swamp or any desire to drain it regardless of whether or not he manages to get the job done. I would also point out that it really wouldn't be hard to make Mexico pay for the wall. Simply cut of any and all foreign aid, which they don't deserve while their government actively works to undercut our sovereignty and violate our border, and there is the money.

 

[Dddrees]

If you're a realist at all you should seek out all personal biases and account for them when deciding things. Do you want to decide on the basis of what is real, or just what makes you feel better? You can take the red pill or the blue one. Your choice.

Right is right and wrong is wrong. I actualy see many things in black and white. This tends to be an issue at times as the real world consents of various shades and many colors. I think it came through and I meant it when I admitted that I have a bias and gave a good example. So yes I'm trying to determine for myself better where the right thing is versus wrong thing or where it is just simply a bias on my part on a number of different things. But as I said there are a number of things I do have strong feelings about where I disagree with what he is doing. These things are not just Republican policies either because a number of them where never Republican policies until after he won the election or until he started campaigning. I actually believe for example that the investigation is warranted. Bias or not I find there is enough to investigate him and I believe he put himself in that position. Of course his followers to a large part may not think so but this is where I think they're bias is showing,

Keep in mind that sometimes it can also be a matter of opinion as to what is the right approach vs a wrong approach. Good people with good intent can simply disagree. I can be a righty and disagree with another righty. So there are a number of times where one might claim this was because of a bias when that's not the case at all. You just simply disagree for other reasons.

I dont find that our country is currently doing a lot of the right things and I think most would agree. Unfortunately there's a lot of disagreement as to which are right things and which are the wrong things and where we want to go. The debt is ridiculous, the entitlements are outrageous, and our infastructure sucks. Not only roads, bridges, but schools as well. So I think we could use a lot of work but right now we're just treading water.


H*** I'm invested in this whole thing. I may not have as long as I did almost 4 decades when I was 20 but I still have sometime left and even more importantly my kids have even more time left. So I have great interest in seeing that things ultimately work out for the better.

 

[Dddrees]

I have no doubt that you personally are acting on largely objective measurement with some bias attached. My point is that the talking heads are acting strictly on bias.

I will also say that Trump would not have been my first choice. Give the opportunity to wave the magic wand, Rand Paul would have been my pick. That said, for all his flaws, Trump is the only candidate who actually got traction that has any problem with the swamp or any desire to drain it regardless of whether or not he manages to get the job done. I would also point out that it really wouldn't be hard to make Mexico pay for the wall. Simply cut of any and all foreign aid, which they don't deserve while their government actively works to undercut our sovereignty and violate our border, and there is the money.

Agreed, it's called entertainment. Unfortunately there's a good bit of money to be made doing this kind of thing.

 

[Dddrees]

I have no doubt that you personally are acting on largely objective measurement with some bias attached. My point is that the talking heads are acting strictly on bias.

I will also say that Trump would not have been my first choice. Give the opportunity to wave the magic wand, Rand Paul would have been my pick. That said, for all his flaws, Trump is the only candidate who actually got traction that has any problem with the swamp or any desire to drain it regardless of whether or not he manages to get the job done. I would also point out that it really wouldn't be hard to make Mexico pay for the wall. Simply cut of any and all foreign aid, which they don't deserve while their government actively works to undercut our sovereignty and violate our border, and there is the money.

I just had had to come back to this.

So you somehow see us charging or not giving one of our largest trading partners and them not finding a way to recoup this lost money in some fashion? That's like telling banks they can't charge us certain fees and expecting them not to try and make up that lost revenue by charging us in some other fashion. It's pipe dream. There's now way a foreign government is going to pay for a wall we want.

Noi if we want a wall we're going to have to pay for it.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I just had had to come back to this.

So you somehow see us charging or not giving one of our largest trading partners and them not finding a way to recoup this lost money in some fashion? That's like telling banks they can't charge us certain fees and expecting them not to try and make up that lost revenue by charging us in some other fashion. It's pipe dream. There's now way a foreign government is going to pay for a wall we want.

Noi if we want a wall we're going to have to pay for it.

Given the actions of the Mexican government toward us, I feel I could make a better argument for war than for giving them money or goods gratis.

 

[Dddrees]

Given the actions of the Mexican government toward us, I feel I could make a better argument for war than for giving them money or goods gratis.

Ok

But we were talking about how one could ever reasonably expect any type of payment from the Mexicans for our wall.

 

[red_zr24x4]

Ok

But we were talking about how one could ever reasonably expect any type of payment from the Mexicans for our wall.

Cut off any and all financial aid, place sanctions against Mexican products, Even U.S. products manufactured in Mexico, impose travel bans to Mexico. Until they pony up

 

[Dddrees]

Cut off any and all financial aid, place sanctions against Mexican products, Even U.S. products manufactured in Mexico, impose travel bans to Mexico. Until they pony up

Well since one of our major trading partners (3rd I think) is Mexico, if we place sanctions on their products we would do nothing but harm ourselves. The fact is we often partner with them on the final product. We send them a part they send us a part and together we build the final product. H***we place sanctions on their products and we won't get a good portion of the products we need. So exactly what sanctions on Mexico do you really see being effective without it doing any harm to us?

 

[red_zr24x4]

Start doing it at home?
Hell buddy, you asked for ways to get them to pay, I threw out 4.

 

[Dddrees]

Start doing it at home?
Hell buddy, you asked for ways to get them to pay, I threw out 4.

I think your missing my point. The promise Trump made and in fact the few ways he said he could get them to do it won't work because in the end we'll end up paying for it in the long run. Now if you have some way of getting them to do it I suggest you tell Trump because to this point he hasn't come up with any good options either. If he had he wouldn't be asking Congress to pay for it. That check in the mail crap just doesn't cut it.

 

[IndyDave1776]

It seems to me that simply repurposing the money we give them would be adequate to build the wall at their expense even if they don't actually send us a check. As for the economic implications, I fail to see where we come out ahead on the deal anyway, so I would argue that it would be no great loss.

 

[Dddrees]

It seems to me that simply repurposing the money we give them would be adequate to build the wall at their expense even if they don't actually send us a check. As for the economic implications, I fail to see where we come out ahead on the deal anyway, so I would argue that it would be no great loss.

So why are we giving them any money? To be honest I have no idea why and how much it is. I imagine it had something to do with discouraging drug trafficking or illegal immigration. But anyway whatever and however much it is I still imagine if we stopped there might be some consequences. But let's go ahead and say we don't pay them any money. I very much doubt whatever it amounts to it's very small when compared to the billions the wall would cost.