Page 21 of 36 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 353

Thread: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

  1. #201
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I fixed your quote to highlight the same type of hypcocrisy on the other side that you failed to highlight. Many on the left have cheered Obama's "prosecutorial discretion" and "executive actions", yet declare he must follow the law exactly in this case.

    Shockingly, yes, both parties have hypocrites or people who rationalize why a different reaction in a different instance is perfectly justifiable.
    True, but the thing is, those leftists aren't here complaining about Obama. On the other hand, we have several posters in this very thread complaining about how Obama doesn't follow the law while demanding that he not follow the law.

    So thanks for pointing out that there are hypocrits on both sides of the political spectrum. That was very relevant to the specific issue being discussed and the posts that posted in this thread
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  2. #202
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    So thanks for pointing out that there are hypocrits on both sides of the political spectrum. That was very relevant to the specific issue being discussed and the posts that posted in this thread
    It is entirely relevant. When your argument against their suggestion is that "they're hypocrites", then inherently that suggests that the argument of liberals suggesting he must "follow the law" in this case is ALSO invalid because they're also hypocrites.

    You established the internal logic of your argument by attempting to disqualify a suggestion based on that suggestion being hypocritical in a general sense based on other things said by that persons ideological side....as such, pointing out that your own suggestions are hypocritical in a general sense based on other things said by people on your ideological side shows that your argument, under your internal logic, is disqualified.

    Either the suggestion from "the right" that Obama "ignore", or take a different interpritation, of the law is a legitimate point and so is the suggestion from "the left" that he must follow the law.....OR....the suggestion from "the right" that he ignore the law is hypocritical and thus invalid, and so is the suggestion from "the left" that he must follow the law.

  3. #203
    Advisor 29A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    St. Louis, MO.
    Last Seen
    02-12-15 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    450

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    There is no indication or classification of these children as "Child trafficing victims’".
    What law do you think should apply?

    (2) Coercion
    The term “coercion” means—

    (A) threats of serious harm to or physical restraint against any person;

    (B) any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; or

    (C) the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process.
    U.S.C. Title 22 - FOREIGN RELATIONS AND INTERCOURSE
    Coercion involves threats of serious harm to, or physical restraint of, any person; any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to preform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; or the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process.
    DHS: How Victims are Trafficked

  4. #204
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    "explore reuniting those children with family members. "

    We should definitely look to reunite these children with their family members, specifically those not in this country.
    The law specifically forbids that.



    There is no indication or classification of these children as "Child trafficing victims’".

    Indeed, the entire “subsection B” that Sanga keeps talking about is stated as thus:

    ”Assistance for trafficking victims”

    These are not trafficking victims. The problem here is that Sangha is desperately attempting to misrepresent these things expecting that people actually can’t do some research. The 2008 reauthorization he keeps pointing to is an update to the 2000 Trafficking Victims Protection Act, which details what exactly trafficking is and thus who would be a “trafficking victim”
    Wrong. They are considered "trafficking victims".

    (Note, the answer is not “any illegal alien child”). Two types of Trafficking is defined in the act:

    There is no indication, what so ever, that these children fall under this provision. There’s been no indication that they’ve been transported for the purpose of sex.

    Again, there’s been no indication that these kids were transported to the US through the use of force, fraud, or coercion to do work in some kind of indebted fashion.

    (SOURCE)
    Those are just two types of trafficking which the law singles out as "severe forms of trafficking in persons"

    (8) SEVERE FORMS OF TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS- The term `severe forms of trafficking in persons' means--
    (A) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or
    (B) the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.
    Indeed, CBP itself notes the primary requirement for something to be human trafficking: "It occurs when a person is induced by force, fraud or coercion" (SOURCE). There was no force, fraud, or coercion here UNLESS the suggestion is that ANYTIME a child is brought/sent to the U.S. by the parent it's "human trafficking" in which case every illegal immigrant coming across with children (Or here already and sending children) are guilty of human trafficking and should be even more stingnetly sought out and prosectued.

    The law is EXPLICITELY for victims of TRAFFICKING, and yet it’s being used here as some kind of cover all for ALL illegal immigrant children. At BEST one can say that this is a judgment call on the part of the administration on how it wants to prosecute these instances…as instances of human trafficking or standard instances of immigration…which takes me back to the highlighted notion of Sangha’s pathetic one sided condemnation of hypocrisy, as the left cheers when Obama makes judgment calls on when/how to not enforce the law but then acts as if he MUST enforce the law in a specific way on another judgment call situation.
    When children are sent by their parents to cross the border, then there is both force and coercion
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  5. #205
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    It is entirely relevant. When your argument against their suggestion is that "they're hypocrites", then inherently that suggests that the argument of liberals suggesting he must "follow the law" in this case is ALSO invalid because they're also hypocrites.
    My pointing out their hypocrisy is not an argument. It is an observation

    My argument is based on the law which I have linked to several times.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  6. #206
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by 29A View Post
    What law do you think should apply?
    Not an expert on immigration laws so can't spout them verbotem off the hip. I was responding to an affirmative claim that they would fall under a specific law. Care to address my argument, or just going to try to divert and act as if that somehow counters what I stated?

  7. #207
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    09-27-16 @ 12:59 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,189

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by Misterveritis View Post
    Mexico has become an enemy country. WE need to prevent Americans from visiting, from spending money in Mexico, and from doing any further business with Mexico.

    We need to give them one, and only one warning, then mass military forces on the border and invade. Push the Mexicans south and create a new, shorter, straight border.
    I sure hope the rest of the crazy right-wing adopts this policy. It is hard to believe that a sane person wrote this posting, but I guess it takes all kinds.

  8. #208
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,193

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Every service they consume, every dollar they make, while they are here illegally.
    It's not exactly that simple. As I understand, in 2008, Congress passed a law that meant people from Central America were treated differently than those from Mexico. Basically there's a decent possibility that some kids coming now from Central America may have a legit asylum claim. If they have a legit asylum claim, we can't legally just turn them back around. That's a US law.

    They should get a day in court. Unfortunately, there are not enough judges to do it that fast. It's a complete system breakdown. It seems very simple in black and white, but as is usually true, it's not that simple.


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

  9. #209
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    48,013

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Wrong. They are considered "trafficking victims".
    Well, it's cute that you claim that but can you articulate exactly how they're "trafficking victims"?

    When children are sent by their parents to cross the border, then there is both force and coercion
    Oh, I thought this would be your desperate attempt to claim this both highlighting your desire to avoid debating this in an intellectually honest way, your desperate attempt to be dishonest and misrepresentative, and your disdain for actually engaging with anyone who disagrees with you as evidenced by you not bothering to actually review my sources.

    These terms include any situation where an individual is forced to do something against their will, or where they are tricked into doing something by someone who is lying to them or suppressing the truth
    There's no indication these children crossed the border against their will, nor any indication that the parent tricked them by "lying" or "supressing the truth". There was no force nor coercion here as it relates to the law. Do you have some evidence as to where the children were made to cross against their will or via "lying" or "supression of the truth"?

    The ONLY possible argument you could claim is that because there was the potential for violence in their homeland, that indicates "coercion" to send them away from it. Then again, using your logic, every illegal alien that enters this country due to "violence" and brings thier child along is "forcing" and "coercing" them to come along. In which case...if you want to go that route, fine; we can begin to round up all these felony offenders wherever we can find them in this country.

  10. #210
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,193

    Re: Border Meltdown: Obama Delivering 290,000 Illegals To U.S. Homes

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    It is entirely relevant. When your argument against their suggestion is that "they're hypocrites", then inherently that suggests that the argument of liberals suggesting he must "follow the law" in this case is ALSO invalid because they're also hypocrites.

    You established the internal logic of your argument by attempting to disqualify a suggestion based on that suggestion being hypocritical in a general sense based on other things said by that persons ideological side....as such, pointing out that your own suggestions are hypocritical in a general sense based on other things said by people on your ideological side shows that your argument, under your internal logic, is disqualified.

    Either the suggestion from "the right" that Obama "ignore", or take a different interpritation, of the law is a legitimate point and so is the suggestion from "the left" that he must follow the law.....OR....the suggestion from "the right" that he ignore the law is hypocritical and thus invalid, and so is the suggestion from "the left" that he must follow the law.
    Yeah, but who keeps going on about how he needs to follow the law? Should he only follow the laws that you want him to follow?


    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    This issue has been plowed more times than Paris Hilton.
    Quote Originally Posted by Oborosen View Post
    Too bad we have to observe human rights.

Page 21 of 36 FirstFirst ... 11192021222331 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •