Page 27 of 36 FirstFirst ... 172526272829 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 353

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

  1. #261
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,169

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

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    I guess you couldn't comprehend the difference between Obama and every President who served before him.

    Let me put it this way, Congress legislates and the President enforces.

    Unknown to the current President, the President can't have it his way every time. The President isn't a monarch king.

    A perfect example would be the Simpson-Mozzoli Act aka IRA of 1986 or better known as "amnesty." It was the Democrats who put an amendment into the IRC rewarding law breakers with amnesty. Reagan felt uncomfortable with the amnesty amendment being added to the bill, Reagan wanted an enforcement bill and nothing else. But Reagan wasn't a king and knew what compromising was. Besides the Democrats said that the amnesty of rewarding criminality would be a one time thing and never repeated again. They seem to have lied because six more amnesties were passed during the Clinton administration.

    Hey Texmex, are you tired of always being lied to by the left ? I sure am.
    Yes, they are being treated according to the law that is currently on the books. Congress legislated, and the President is acting in accordance with that legislation. I know that Obama's record in that regard is a little spotty, but either you want him to enforce the laws or you don't. If you want him to pick and choose which laws he enforces, you can't scream when he does that differently than you'd like.


    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.

  2. #262
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,169

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

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Was that before or after Truman lost China to the communist ?
    It was long before Nixon extended recongnition to the Communist government.


    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.

  3. #263
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

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


  4. #264
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

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

    Quote Originally Posted by michijo View Post
    How can an American lose China land to communism? China is not his possession to lose. Neither is Latin America. You must suffer from Conservative Entitlement disorder. This is a mental problem conservatives have where they feel entitled to ownership and control of the whole world. Many Democrats suffer from it as well, like when Obama bombed Libya. American Entitlement Disorder.
    You are defiantly not a politico.

    To understand all of the partisan bickering in America's politics today, who have to understand how it all started.

    Just go back to 1960 Presidential race, Nixon vs. Kennedy. It all came down to who would be tougher against communist expansion in the world, Nixon or Kennedy ?

    With the help of the Cook County, Illinois cemeteries Kennedy was elected.

    "WHO LOST CHINA" DEBATE

    >" In 1949 communist armies led by Mao Zedong defeated the nationalist regime of Chiang Kai-shek. The communists took control of the Chinese mainland, establishing the People's Republic of China, while Chiang Kai-shek, who had received U.S. support during the conflict, fled to the island of Taiwan. China, previously a loyal U.S. ally and a country Americans felt particularly familiar with because of the strong presence of American Christian missionaries, overnight became one of America's most bitter enemies. With the post–World War II world starkly divided into American and communist spheres of influence, the Chinese shift was seen as a serious loss. From the establishment of the People's Republic of China well into the Korean War and the witch hunts of the McCarthy era, a debate raged in Washington about whom to blame for the loss of China to communist forces. At the time, most of the blame fell on the administration of President Harry Truman, as well as fellow-travelers and subversives. Studies in the late twentieth century, however, challenged this view and emphasized Chiang Kai-shek's own weaknesses. Although without the urgency of the 1940s and 1950s, the debate over "who lost China" recurrently appeared within American society during the second half of the twentieth century. The debate has informed American responses to crises in the region as well as within China itself, such as the Tiananmen Square repression in 1989. … "<

    http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-...na-debate.html

  5. #265
    Mod Conspiracy Theorist
    rocket88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    A very blue state
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:17 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,169

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

    Whether or not they are trafficking victims may be a matter for the courts to decide. You know, court of law, innocent until proven guilty....**** like that.


    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.

  6. #266
    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

    If you're going to use Zyphlin as backup, you might want to read the posts where he eventually agreed with me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Alright, read over everything another time now. I acknowledge my mistake in stating that it explitely is speaking only of "trafficking victims"...while the laws intention and stated purpose is clear, the language is not and the first part does cover all alien children of a non-contiguous country.
    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..

  7. #267
    Professor
    Derp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Dunedin, Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    1,290

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

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    That's right, why aren't these people posting a bond like all Americans have to do when they are given a court date be it for j-walking or DUI ?
    Immigration law as with J-walking is civil not criminal, so they don't need to post bail for they haven't committed a crime, it is a violation of immigration laws.

  8. #268
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,994

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

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    I can see why you might think it's saying that the family the child is with is not here legally, but it's not clear. The hope they speak of may be the families hope that the child will be naturalized.
    I agree completely, and acknowledged, that it wasn't clear. Everything surrounding it has a lot of ambiguity. I'd hope you'd at least acknowledge though that the lack of clarity and abundance of ambiguity makes it reasonable to question whether or not those "immigrants" they speak of are legal or not.

    As far as your later point, about the child's parent being a citizen, I'll note two things. One is that there is a difference between a parent that is here legally, and a parent that is a citizen. The parent can be here legally, but not be a citizen which may (I don't) mean that the child can come here.
    From what I've seen, people here as non-citizens but permanently legal residents can still legally bring their children with them UNLESS the means in which they are being granted a visa is because the U.S. Citizen sponsoring them is their spouse, child, or parents (SOURCE). So for instance, a U.S. Citizen sponsoring their child's permanent residency doesn't allow that child to automatically bring along their own child. However, the person petitioning for the initial visa can petition for one for hte child as well.

    So by and large, yes...there are legal avenues of bringing one's children into the country that could be taken in almost any fashion of legal residency here in the U.S. For someone to forgo those avenues to send their children on a dangerous voyage, perhaps with a criminal, across the boarder is ridiculously irresponsable.

    Also, it refers to parents while my understanding is that these children are often being placed with "family". That can mean aunt, uncle, cousin or whatever. It doesn't necessarily refer to a parent.
    And I've referenecd "family" as opposed to "parents" numerous times. And as I said, if the family member is LEGALLY here then under this law I have no issue with the children being delivered there. However, I do believe part of the investigation into the environment would need to be whether or not that relative knew of the dangerous and reckless endevour the child was sent on and if they made any effort to push for a safe and legal means of bringing the child into the country. If the relative or parent KNEW that the child was being sent across the boarder in an illegal and dangerous fashion, and either condoned or assist with it, then I HIGHLY question the quality of care and environment that they would provide.

  9. #269
    Sage
    Visbek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:44 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,015

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    nope there is no war. violence is everywhere that is not a reason for aslyum to the US.
    Refugee status is not exclusively about war.

    (42) The term “refugee” means
    (A) any person who is outside any country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, is outside any country in which such person last habitually resided, and who is unable or unwilling to return to, and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of, that country because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion, or

    (B) in such special circumstances as the President after appropriate consultation (as defined in section 1157 (e) of this title) may specify, any person who is within the country of such person’s nationality or, in the case of a person having no nationality, within the country in which such person is habitually residing, and who is persecuted or who has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. The term “refugee” does not include any person who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. For purposes of determinations under this chapter, a person who has been forced to abort a pregnancy or to undergo involuntary sterilization, or who has been persecuted for failure or refusal to undergo such a procedure or for other resistance to a coercive population control program, shall be deemed to have been persecuted on account of political opinion, and a person who has a well founded fear that he or she will be forced to undergo such a procedure or subject to persecution for such failure, refusal, or resistance shall be deemed to have a well founded fear of persecution on account of political opinion.

    8 U.S. Code § 1101 - Definitions | LII / Legal Information Institute


    then they can ask for alsyum the correct legal way instead of cross the border illegally.
    That's not relevant. You don't apply for asylum before leaving your home country. You flee and then request asylum.


    they are doing it the illegal way which gives them 0 standing to ask for anything.
    Incorrect. US law -- not the whims of pissed-off conservatives -- dictates how applications for asylum are handled. If they were not following the correct process, they would be handled differently.


    any president that allows an invasion of this country is a bad president.
    Then I guess Reagan, Bush 41 and 43 were also "bad Presidents."

  10. #270
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Derp View Post
    Immigration law as with J-walking is civil not criminal, so they don't need to post bail for they haven't committed a crime, it is a violation of immigration laws.
    I'm old enough to remember when j-walking in California was a misdemeanor treated as a moving violation. Today it's an infraction.

    I remember when cops could shoot at fleeing felons and what the **** was a "Miranda" ?

Page 27 of 36 FirstFirst ... 172526272829 ... 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
  •