• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

ICE Set Up A Fake College To Bust Immigrants For Trying To Legally Stay In The Country While They Ea

Cramer said:
Those were unproven theories...I thought that was clear.
(well except the one about Bohner being an ass, that is pretty accurate)

What are you thoughts on the Hastert Rule?

Are you suggesting Obama should have declared a national Emergency?
That too would have been ****ing stupid. The immigration problem is a problem, not an emergency.

Obama did sign an EO, to alter the way the laws were enforced, since the Republicans failed to their their job. (in the House).

And what happen? Republicans freaked out, and called him every name in the book for over reaching his authority.....

Do you support this national emergency cluster****?
Click to expand...

Don't care for he Hastert rule. After seeing both sides of the argument for it and against it. It looks more like such an informal rule is used as a relevant whipping post, to prop up whoever is the current target.

Obama declared over a dozen national emergencies. A majority of which are still in affect, so I wouldn't of cared either way. I'm suggested that Obama should've done more than pay an extended form of lip service to what was arguably an issue, even during his presidency.

Yet the underlying cause of family separations still continued. I don't mind that he signed an EO to try and get things done. But you still attempting to just lay this at the feet of the republicans is getting old. You and I both know that it's never that simple.

I don't care that outliers freaked, no one around me, nor with me on the stance of the border issue freak and the only ones I saw who did. Got more than enough air time. Which given the political climate, it was obvious to see why they were being made to look like such a large group.

I care for the president trying to fix a current issue. If he has to call a national emergency to do so, I'll give him the chance. Though to be clear I don't completely like the fact that a national emergency had to be called in the end. This still makes him no different than any of his predecessors.
 
Oborosen said:
Don't care for he Hastert rule. After seeing both sides of the argument for it and against it. It looks more like such an informal rule is used as a relevant whipping post, to prop up whoever is the current target.

Obama declared over a dozen national emergencies. A majority of which are still in affect, so I wouldn't of cared either way. I'm suggested that Obama should've done more than pay an extended form of lip service to what was arguably an issue, even during his presidency.

Yet the underlying cause of family separations still continued. I don't mind that he signed an EO to try and get things done. But you still attempting to just lay this at the feet of the republicans is getting old. You and I both know that it's never that simple.

I don't care that outliers freaked, no one around me, nor with me on the stance of the border issue freak and the only ones I saw who did. Got more than enough air time. Which given the political climate, it was obvious to see why they were being made to look like such a large group.

I care for the president trying to fix a current issue. If he has to call a national emergency to do so, I'll give him the chance. Though to be clear I don't completely like the fact that a national emergency had to be called in the end. This still makes him no different than any of his predecessors.
Click to expand...

Glad we can can on the stupid Hastert rule.

Regarding Obama's Emergencies....do any of those include doing an end around congress, to fund a pet project?

It is NOT a national emergency. Trump wants a wall. We do not need a wall. We need better border security, which democrats are willing to do.

This is pretty screwed up:

'Death sentence': butterfly sanctuary to be bulldozed for Trump's border wall | Environment | The Guardian
 
Cramer said:
Glad we can can on the stupid Hastert rule.

Regarding Obama's Emergencies....do any of those include doing an end around congress, to fund a pet project?

It is NOT a national emergency. Trump wants a wall. We do not need a wall. We need better border security, which democrats are willing to do.

This is pretty screwed up:

'Death sentence': butterfly sanctuary to be bulldozed for Trump's border wall | Environment | The Guardian
Click to expand...

A pet project that at least half of the country was willing to give a shot. I don't care for it either way, the wall was blown up by the democrats to be a waste of tax payer money, a destruction to the ecosystem and in the very end they claimed it was racist... do you not see how stupid the whole argument had become. If all these years of both parties just "talking" about improving border security didn't do a damn. Then why are people so upset when a president actually tries to do something about it?

The wall isn't going to cost nearly as much as the democrats fear mongered about. Not even 1.5% of our yearly budget to say the least. So I'm willing to give it a shot.

All this talk about the poor illegal immigrants being forced to take more dangerous routes into the country, is not on us. It suck for them, I know. But that is the truth of it and we already have ways for legal immigration into this country. With legal immigrants who are trying to get their chance to enter and are instead being pushed back in line, in favor of those that cut into it.

On the point of the butterfly sanctuary, I don't know anything about. It wasn't brought up when the wall was originally built and from recent experience. I can probably guess it's some activist group that wants to dig their heels in on something, while still crying foul about making things harder on the illegal immigrants that will be forced to take another route.

In all respects we could actually use the wall, seeing as they do work. Other countries have put up walls across their borders and taken large chunks out of their numbers for illegal border crossings.

So why can't we?
 
Oborosen said:
A pet project that at least half of the country was willing to give a shot.
Click to expand...

That is simply not true.
A majority of Americans (58%) oppose substantially expanding the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border – as Trump has sought – while 40% support doing so, according to a January 2019 survey by the Center
Click to expand...
How Americans see illegal immigration, the border wall and political compromise | Pew Research Center


I don't care for it either way, the wall was blown up by the democrats to be a waste of tax payer money, a destruction to the ecosystem and in the very end they claimed it was racist... do you not see how stupid the whole argument had become. If all these years of both parties just "talking" about improving border security didn't do a damn. Then why are people so upset when a president actually tries to do something about it?
Click to expand...

You agreed the Hastert rule is/was stupid. Yet, that is the reason immigration reform did not happen in 2013, which included billions in more border security. One party...your party, is mostly responsible for immigration reform still being an issue.

The wall isn't going to cost nearly as much as the democrats fear mongered about. Not even 1.5% of our yearly budget to say the least. So I'm willing to give it a shot.
Click to expand...

2019 spending budget, is 4 trillion dollars. 1.5% of 4 trillion, is 60 billion dollars.




All this talk about the poor illegal immigrants being forced to take more dangerous routes into the country, is not on us. It suck for them, I know. But that is the truth of it and we already have ways for legal immigration into this country. With legal immigrants who are trying to get their chance to enter and are instead being pushed back in line, in favor of those that cut into it.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of people that are here illegally, do not cross the border illegally. They stay illegally.

On the point of the butterfly sanctuary, I don't know anything about. It wasn't brought up when the wall was originally built and from recent experience. I can probably guess it's some activist group that wants to dig their heels in on something, while still crying foul about making things harder on the illegal immigrants that will be forced to take another route.
Click to expand...

Why are you guessing? I linked an article. It spelled it out pretty well.
I am no liberal tree hugger, but the environmental damage building the wall is some of these very remote areas can cause irreparable damage. Conserve, is literally the root word in conservative. The irony is incredible.

In all respects we could actually use the wall, seeing as they do work. Other countries have put up walls across their borders and taken large chunks out of their numbers for illegal border crossings.
Click to expand...

That is really not true as well.
If the United States does indeed build a wall along its southern border and then monitors it effectively, it may succeed in curbing illegal immigration, but it will not end it. Walls cannot prevent people from overstaying their visas or being smuggled in another way. And if history is any precedent, illegal immigrants may attempt to tunnel under the wall, go over it or breach it some other way.
Click to expand...

Ex-Iraq War vet: The truth about what border walls can and cannot accomplish | Fox News
So why can't we?
Click to expand...

Because it's ****ing stupid, extremely expensive, an environmental disaster, takes private land away from property owners, and is not truly effective.
 
Cramer said:
That is simply not true.
Click to expand...

Great, another graph, another poll, on site where we've seen hundreds. If no one at least gave the wall a thought, he never wouldn't been elected.

You agreed the Hastert rule is/was stupid. Yet, that is the reason immigration reform did not happen in 2013, which included billions in more border security. One party...your party, is mostly responsible for immigration reform still being an issue.
Click to expand...
If Obama had actually planned to follow through with it, I would agree with you. But the reason for the republicans doing as such was because they only believed he would pay lip service and nothing more.

2019 spending budget, is 4 trillion dollars. 1.5% of 4 trillion, is 60 billion dollars.
Click to expand...
Was I wrong?

The vast majority of people that are here illegally, do not cross the border illegally. They stay illegally.
Click to expand...
That right there is already a highly debated topic. After seeing accounts from sites like politico, vox, factcheck. The number keeps dancing between half and over half. But what you're still forgetting is that can still be as much as half. I don't care that it's not the majority of the issue. I just care that it is still an issue.

Why are you guessing? I linked an article. It spelled it out pretty well.
I am no liberal tree hugger, but the environmental damage building the wall is some of these very remote areas can cause irreparable damage. Conserve, is literally the root word in conservative. The irony is incredible.
I said as such because this is the first I've ever heard of it and this wouldn't be the first time that I've been fed a sob story about some protected land, that was a completely fabricated lie. Pipe-lines up north, offshore drilling and natural gas collection. I've seen some pretty shady stories about all of it and I don't even know if the administration is going to actually go through the damn thing in the end.

That is really not true as well.
Click to expand...
Seeing as a wall has a pretty simple job to do and places spanning from Spain to Israel have put up walls over the last few years to help stem the tide of illegal crossing. I doubt there is any real credence to just saying that we don't have to build one ourselves. Besides the wall was never meant to stop illegal immigration completely. It was meant to help make the flow more manageable and that is all. The reform to follow into our policies would be a definite plus as well.

Because it's ****ing stupid, extremely expensive, an environmental disaster, takes private land away from property owners, and is not truly effective.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It's just a wall, a barrier, it has a simple job to do and that is it. One that wouldn't even cost 10billion for the year. It will only be an environmental disaster if it's done poorly, which I've seen no evidence for either side of that argument as of yet. Eminent domain is a law, if you don't like that law, then I suggest you move to some place where it's less likely to be used. This doesn't cover the fact though that if the government takes your property for such a reason. You will have the right to fair compensation.

Walls are walls, nothing more. Saying that a wall is ineffective with so many other countries doing the same is a asinine point to make.
Click to expand...
 
Oborosen said:
Great, another graph, another poll, on site where we've seen hundreds. If no one at least gave the wall a thought, he never wouldn't been elected.


If Obama had actually planned to follow through with it, I would agree with you. But the reason for the republicans doing as such was because they only believed he would pay lip service and nothing more.


Was I wrong?


That right there is already a highly debated topic. After seeing accounts from sites like politico, vox, factcheck. The number keeps dancing between half and over half. But what you're still forgetting is that can still be as much as half. I don't care that it's not the majority of the issue. I just care that it is still an issue.

Why are you guessing? I linked an article. It spelled it out pretty well.
I am no liberal tree hugger, but the environmental damage building the wall is some of these very remote areas can cause irreparable damage. Conserve, is literally the root word in conservative. The irony is incredible.

It's just a wall, a barrier, it has a simple job to do and that is it. One that wouldn't even cost 10billion for the year. It will only be an environmental disaster if it's done poorly, which I've seen no evidence for either side of that argument as of yet. Eminent domain is a law, if you don't like that law, then I suggest you move to some place where it's less likely to be used. This doesn't cover the fact though that if the government takes your property for such a reason. You will have the right to fair compensation.

Walls are walls, nothing more. Saying that a wall is ineffective with so many other countries doing the same is a asinine point to make.
Click to expand...

I am done with you. You do not reads links, you can't understand simple processes (ie congress passes immigration bill, President signs said bill, immigration is addressed, and you keep, for some whacked out reason, blame Obama. He would have signed the bill, but he could not,as Bohner refused to even put it up for a vote), and it appears you do not know how to use the quote function, or go back to edit it after you screwed it up.

You have officially become a waste of time.

Ciao!
 
Cramer said:
Oborosen said:
Great, another graph, another poll, on site where we've seen hundreds. If no one at least gave the wall a thought, he never wouldn't been elected.


If Obama had actually planned to follow through with it, I would agree with you. But the reason for the republicans doing as such was because they only believed he would pay lip service and nothing more.


Was I wrong?


That right there is already a highly debated topic. After seeing accounts from sites like politico, vox, factcheck. The number keeps dancing between half and over half. But what you're still forgetting is that can still be as much as half. I don't care that it's not the majority of the issue. I just care that it is still an issue.



I am done with you. You do not reads links, you can't understand simple processes (ie congress passes immigration bill, President signs said bill, immigration is addressed, and you keep for some whacked out reason, blame Obama. He would signed the bill, but he could not,as Bohner refused to even put it up for a vote), and it appears you do not know how to use the quote function, or go back to edit it after you screwed it up.

You have officially become a waste of time.

Ciao!
Click to expand...

Yes, by all means. Run.

Also I don't hold Obama responsible, it's just that I'm not going to willingly blind myself out of partisanship.
Click to expand...
 
Cramer said:
Oborosen said:
Run?

:roll:

You have become a waste of time.

Ciao.
Click to expand...

I would rather be a waste of time, than a willingly wasted life and mind.

The lot of you are bitching and moaning over a wall, when it hasn't even been that long since the democrats wanted to build some form of boarder barrier. I'm tired of watching children cry over imagined slights. But it's good to see that you don't entirely lack a spine. Because lets face it, that's been an issue with theft for far too long now.

I have no issue with wanting better treatment of immigrants and better access into the country. A faster path to citizenship, good. Go right on ahead and make that dream a reality. But I will not stand by and watch people who don't even intend to follow one of the most basic laws of this country and at worst, can harbor intense malice towards actual citizens.

I know that's not what you support, who in the hell would actually do so?
The wall would help slow the flow, nothing more, nothing less. Less criminals, less drugs, less human trafficking. That's pretty much all I really want.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom