Page 66 of 135 FirstFirst ... 57585960616263646566676869707172737475 ... LastLast
Results 976 to 990 of 2015

Thread: 2018 American Political Scene

  1. #976
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    3,705
    I see that Trump has made the cover of his off and on favorite magazine, Time. He should really love this one after he calms down from his ballistic tweets sure to come.

  2. #977
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,029

    This is how civilized people think about this administration.

    How Trump’s Policy Change Led Migrant Children to Be Separated From Their Parents
    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...eparation.html

    Migrant families separated: This was a very ugly week in America

    https://news.sky.com/story/migrant-f...erica-11411619

    These are the distant states where migrant children are being sent
    https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/21/u...ren/index.html

    New York mayor 'shocked' that migrant children as young as nine months secretly sent to his city
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...nths-secretly/

    Airlines to Trump administration: Don't fly migrant children separated from their families on our planes
    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/20/airl...on-planes.html

    Hundreds flock to New York City’s LaGuardia to greet migrant children flown in from the border
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.5ac8a9ac5ca2

    It gets worse.
    Much worse.


    Reports have spread that shelter workers can’t comfort migrant children. Rules aren’t that simple.
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.3b3b39b2d309

    Migrant Children Separated From Parents at Border Were Forcibly Drugged: Lawsuit
    http://www.newsweek.com/migrant-chil...lawsuit-988069

    Separated Migrant Children Face Lasting Psychological Trauma
    https://www.livescience.com/62874-ps...-children.html

    The health impact of separating migrant children from parents
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-44528900

    The places the government sends migrant children face allegations of abuse
    Lawsuits allege that children and teens were beaten and handcuffed in Virginia and forcibly drugged in Texas.

    https://www.vox.com/2018/6/21/174881...children-abuse

    The right of rebuttle:


    Sessions: Migrant children facilities not like Nazi Germany because 'they were keeping the Jews from leaving'

    https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/19/p...ion/index.html
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  3. #978
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    GVChamp,

    It isn’t binary; saying that the status quo isn’t acceptable in response to my comment about the way children are being treated by this administration is at best a distraction and more likely a deliberate effort to muddy the waters.

    No, it isn’t the case that ‘everyone did it.’
    No, it isn’t as if ‘all politicians lie.’
    No, Trump isn’t the fifth or seventh worst president in history.
    No, the previous administration didn’t separate families the way this one has.
    No, no one is suggesting ‘just letting in every family with kids claiming asylum’ is the solution.
    No, the alternative to the way this administration has been treating children isn’t open borders.
    No, it isn’t necessary for me – or anyone – to have a solution.
    What is necessary is for anyone who claims to be a Christian, or a Republican, to speak up against this atrocity.

    What’s your excuse?

    = = = = =

    Snapper,
    No, I am not religiously inclined and by the way that has zero to do with the issue.
    Read what I wrote.

    = = = = =


    Surfgun,
    We already have a thread on the horrors of fake news.
    What's your excuse?
    I don't agree with either of the above. You absolutely can criticize a policy, but you should probably understand how we arrived at this point and what the potential steps forward are before simpy castigating blame on everything you don't like. All societies have dirty parts and ugly compromises, and that's probably going to be with us until we reach utopia.

    The Democratic solution isn't open borders explicitly, but it is effectively open borders. If you cross the border as a family, they do not believe you should be detained. If you choose not to show up to your deportation hearing, they do not believe you should be pursued (unless you commit another crime). If you are an illegal immigrant, they largely believe that local and state governments have the burden of educating you and providing for your basic needs and allowing you to run your life as if you were legal, say by issuing you a driver's license (even if the federal government has no direct obligation).

    You either have to detain families or let them in the country. If you let them in the country and they don't show up to their hearings, you have to find them. If you do neither detain them nor make an effort to find them, you are a de facto open borders advocate. If you claim every immigration enforcement mechanism is oppression because it looks ugly to you, you are a de facto open borders advocate, even if you don't actually believe in de jure open borders. It's like saying you think murder shouldn't be a crime, but we shouldn't bother ourselves with tracking down murderers because it isn't worth the time.
    Last edited by GVChamp; 21 Jun 18, at 19:04.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  4. #979
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,029
    GVChamp,

    “The Democratic solution isn't open borders explicitly, but it is effectively ...” well, effectively it is “stop acting like amoral jerks.” What kind of a world view endorses separating kids from their parents – endangering the kids, not to protect them – without any court of law having any say whatsoever?

    “If you cross the border as a family, they do not believe you should be detained.”
    Horseshit. Have a look at the Democratic Party platform and cite me chapter and verse.

    “If you choose not to show up to your deportation hearing, they do not believe you should be pursued (unless you commit another crime).”
    Horseshit. You seem to think that the ones who are most vocal on this issue speak – accurately – for the entire Democratic Party. Not the case, and frankly usually isn’t the case on any issue.

    “If you are an illegal immigrant, they largely believe that local and state governments have the burden of educating you and providing for your basic needs and allowing you to run your life as if you were legal, say by issuing you a driver's license (even if the federal government has no direct obligation).”
    In addition to the previous, are you telling me that children brought to another country without their ability to consent should be kept as uneducated as humanly possible? That their basic needs should be deliberately ignored, no, suppressed?

    Back to the earlier question: What kind of a world view endorses such things?

    = = = = =

    The reason the US isn't faced with a Japanese style aging problem is immigration.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  5. #980
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,572
    Here's the Democrats immigration platform. So a mother comes into Texas from Mexico with her kid and claims asylum. What's the solution, based on what you see below?

    Fixing our Broken Immigration System
    The United States was founded as, and continues to be, a country of immigrants from throughout the world. It is no coincidence that the Statue of Liberty is one of our most profound national symbols. And that is why Democrats believe immigration is not just a problem to be solved, it is a defining aspect of the American character and our shared history.
    The Democratic Party supports legal immigration, within reasonable limits, that meets the needs of families, communities, and the economy as well as maintains the United States’ role as a beacon of hope for people seeking safety, freedom, and security. People should come to the United States with visas and not through smugglers. Yet, we recognize that the current immigration system is broken.
    More than 11 million people are living in the shadows, without proper documentation. The immigration bureaucracy is full of backlogs that result in U.S. citizens waiting for decades to be reunited with family members, and green card holders waiting for years to be reunited with their spouses and minor children. The current quota system discriminates against certain immigrants, including immigrants of color, and needs to be reformed to the realities of the 21st century. And there are real questions about our detention and deportation policies that must be addressed.
    Democrats believe we need to urgently fix our broken immigration system—which tears families apart and keeps workers in the shadows—and create a path to citizenship for law-abiding families who are here, making a better life for their families and contributing to their communities and our country. We should repeal the 3-year, 10-year and permanent bars, which often force persons in mixed status families into the heartbreaking dilemma of either pursuing a green card by leaving the country and their loved ones behind, or remaining in the shadows. We will work with Congress to end the forced and prolonged expulsion from the country that these immigrants endure when trying to adjust their status.
    We must fix family backlogs and defend against those who would exclude or eliminate legal immigration avenues and denigrate immigrants. Those immigrants already living in the United States, who are assets to their communities and contribute so much to our country, should be incorporated completely into our society through legal processes that give meaning to our national motto: E Pluribus Unum.
    And while we continue to fight for comprehensive immigration reform, we will defend and implement President Obama’s Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and Deferred Action for Parents of Americans executive actions to help DREAMers, parents of citizens, and lawful permanent residents avoid deportation. We will build on these actions to provide relief for others, such as parents of DREAMers. We will support efforts by states to make DREAMers eligible for driver's licenses and in-state college tuition. We will invest in culturally-appropriate immigrant integration services, expand access to English language education, and promote naturalization to help the millions of people who are eligible for citizenship take that last step.
    We believe immigration enforcement must be humane and consistent with our values. We should prioritize those who pose a threat to the safety of our communities, not hardworking families who are contributing to their communities. We will end raids and roundups of children and families, which unnecessarily sow fear in immigrant communities. We disfavor deportations of immigrants who served in our armed forces, and we want to create a faster path for such veterans to citizenship.
    We should ensure due process for those fleeing violence in Central America and work with our regional partners to address the root causes of violence. We must take particular care with children, which is why we should guarantee government-funded counsel for unaccompanied children in immigration courts. We should consider all available means of protecting these individuals from the threats to their lives and safety—including strengthening in-country and third-country processing, expanding the use of humanitarian parole, and granting Temporary Protected Status.
    We will promote best practices among local law enforcement, in terms of how they collaborate with federal authorities, to ensure that they maintain and build trust between local law enforcement and the communities they serve. We will also vigorously oversee any programs put in place, to make sure that there are no abuses and no arbitrary deportation programs. We will establish an affirmative process for workers to report labor violations and to request deferred action. We will work to ensure that all Americans—regardless of immigration status—have access to quality health care. That means expanding community health centers, allowing all families to buy into the Affordable Care Act exchanges, supporting states that open up their public health insurance programs to all persons, and finally enacting comprehensive immigration reform. And we will expand opportunities for DREAMers to serve in the military and to then receive expedited pathways to citizenship.
    We will fight to end federal, state, and municipal contracts with for-profit private prisons and private detention centers. In order to end family detention, we will ensure humane alternatives for those who pose no public threat. We recognize that there are vulnerable communities within our immigration system who are often seeking refuge from persecution abroad, such as LGBT families, for whom detention can be unacceptably dangerous.
    We reject attempts to impose a religious test to bar immigrants or refugees from entering the United States. It is un-American and runs counter to the founding principles of this country.
    Finally, Democrats will not stand for the divisive and derogatory language of Donald Trump. His offensive comments about immigrants and other communities have no place in our society. This kind of rhetoric must be rejected.
    The only real possibility of deportation is if she shows up to a deportation hearing and the judge denies her asylum hearing. But if she doesn't show up, she isn't ever going to be pursued, in a few years her kid is going to be a DREAMER and she will have deferred action (IE, no action) against her or her child, along with a path to citizenship. That's not a solution, it's just de facto open borders for any family claiming asylum, even if you catch and immediately deport every single solo adult male crossing the border.
    Last edited by GVChamp; 25 Jun 18, at 16:18.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  6. #981
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,029
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    Here's the Democrats immigration platform.

    Thanks for finding that.

    I think the part that seems to be missed most often is this:

    The Democratic Party supports legal immigration, within reasonable limits, that meets the needs of families, communities, and the economy as well as maintains the United States’ role as a beacon of hope for people seeking safety, freedom, and security.

    People should come to the United States with visas and not through smugglers.

    Yet, we recognize that the current immigration system is broken.

    And there are real questions about our detention and deportation policies that must be addressed.

    Democrats believe we need to urgently fix our broken immigration system—which tears families apart and keeps workers in the shadows—and create a path to citizenship for law-abiding families who are here, making a better life for their families and contributing to their communities and our country.

    Those immigrants already living in the United States, who are assets to their communities and contribute so much to our country, should be incorporated completely into our society through legal processes that give meaning to our national motto: E Pluribus Unum.

    And, the kicker:

    We believe immigration enforcement must be humane and consistent with our values. We should prioritize those who pose a threat to the safety of our communities, not hardworking families who are contributing to their communities.

    Was there something there you didn’t agree with?
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  7. #982
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    Thanks for finding that.

    I think the part that seems to be missed most often is this:

    The Democratic Party supports legal immigration, within reasonable limits, that meets the needs of families, communities, and the economy as well as maintains the United States’ role as a beacon of hope for people seeking safety, freedom, and security.

    People should come to the United States with visas and not through smugglers.

    Yet, we recognize that the current immigration system is broken.

    And there are real questions about our detention and deportation policies that must be addressed.

    Democrats believe we need to urgently fix our broken immigration system—which tears families apart and keeps workers in the shadows—and create a path to citizenship for law-abiding families who are here, making a better life for their families and contributing to their communities and our country.

    Those immigrants already living in the United States, who are assets to their communities and contribute so much to our country, should be incorporated completely into our society through legal processes that give meaning to our national motto: E Pluribus Unum.

    And, the kicker:

    We believe immigration enforcement must be humane and consistent with our values. We should prioritize those who pose a threat to the safety of our communities, not hardworking families who are contributing to their communities.

    Was there something there you didn’t agree with?
    Where're the parts about the enforcement and deportation? Except that our deportation policies are bad, because of unstated reasons, and everyone here gets citizenship and doesn't get deported? That's de facto open borders for anyone already here, and will continue to be the case for the indefinite future. I go somewhere with a kid, claim I am a family, I cannot be held in a detention facility. I am released, and am now "here," which means I get citizenship. There's no room for legal recourse for the government in the above.
    Last edited by GVChamp; 05 Jul 18, at 15:28.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  8. #983
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,161
    This is how the Democratic Party must run:

    https://www.politico.com/magazine/st...mp-2020-218947

    If Democrats are wise, they will embrace President Donald Trump’s demonstration that there no longer are any unwritten rules in American politics. (I’ve come to think that the key text for understanding our era is the 1997 movie Air Bud: “There’s no rule that says a dog can’t play basketball.”) Democrats should be preparing to exercise power, beginning as early as 2020, with that lesson in mind.

    As we all know, Trump and the Republican Party that enables him eat norms for breakfast. A norm is a tacit and mutual agreement that certain exercises of power, while lawful, also are unthinkable. As a result, a willingness to think the unthinkable is itself a source of power. With that willingness, you can deny a president a hearing on a Supreme Court nominee. You can threaten to jail your political opponents and call an election rigged if you don’t win. You can demand investigations of your enemies, you can fire the FBI director investigating you, and you can quite possibly pardon yourself for federal crimes.


    Trump and Republicans are not interested in self-restraint. We ought to be past surprise, for example, that the “let the people decide” standard invented by Mitch McConnell to block Merrick Garland’s Supreme Court nomination no longer applies now that Trump can choose a successor for Anthony Kennedy. Those who care about the future of liberal democracy in this country ought to be beyond outrage and ready for something altogether colder and more disciplined.

    Democrats should plan to treat political norms, when and if they’re in charge of a unified government, the way Trump and the Republicans do. They should be readying a program of systematic norm-breaking for partisan advantage—but only if they are willing and able to follow it through to its conclusion.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  9. #984
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,161
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    I am released, and am now "here," which means I get citizenship.
    I am here means I get citizenship? Wow, I was a fool to have actually spent a bunch of money to go through the green card and citizenship process, even to bother with a legal immigrant status, since getting a citizenship is that easy. SMH
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  10. #985
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,029
    GVChamp,

    I don’t see anything in the Democratic Party platform about enforcement of . . . traffic laws, either. Not in the GOPer platform, as far as I can tell. Is there some reason why enforcement and deportation – which were soaring under Obama – needed to be mentioned?

    And, please point out the part about “everyone here gets citizenship and doesn’t get deported.”

    Finally, please point out the part about “I go somewhere with a kid, claim I am a family, I cannot be held in a detention facility. I am released, and am now "here," which means I get citizenship.”

    Because, I can’t find those bits.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  11. #986
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    GVChamp,

    I don’t see anything in the Democratic Party platform about enforcement of . . . traffic laws, either. Not in the GOPer platform, as far as I can tell. Is there some reason why enforcement and deportation – which were soaring under Obama – needed to be mentioned?

    And, please point out the part about “everyone here gets citizenship and doesn’t get deported.”

    Finally, please point out the part about “I go somewhere with a kid, claim I am a family, I cannot be held in a detention facility. I am released, and am now "here," which means I get citizenship.”

    Because, I can’t find those bits.
    You can find it, you're just willfully not seeing it. The deportations of people under Obama include people caught and deported at the border. The number of people deported from inside the nation is pretty small compared to the overall size of the illegal population. Also, no one is saying you can't deport ANYONE at the border, but the Democratic base and leadership are calling for differences in treatement between single adult men and families. You can (currently) detain and deport single adult men. You cannot do the same with families, because children can't be held in detention camps.

    If you don't want them held in detention camps, that's fine. Let them go. Then they need to provide an address and have regular check-ins with the immigration authorities and need to show up for their asylum hearings. If they fail any of that, then there's no path to citizenship for them, ever, and they get deported as soon as ICE finds them. Local government agencies have a responsibility to report such people to ICE, and it is up to ICE to determine whether or not they get deported. States and cities supporting a "sanctuary city" policy get approriately penalized on their funds.

    If your policy is instead that they can't be held, they can't be investigated, they should be allowed a path to citizenship if they are "here," and they should be entitled to all public services, then you have de facto open borders.

    I am here means I get citizenship? Wow, I was a fool to have actually spent a bunch of money to go through the green card and citizenship process, even to bother with a legal immigrant status, since getting a citizenship is that easy. SMH
    There's a difference between current US policy, past US policy, and future US policy.
    Last edited by GVChamp; 06 Jul 18, at 15:01.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  12. #987
    Senior Contributor antimony's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Feb 08
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    4,161
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    There's a difference between current US policy, past US policy, and future US policy.
    Which one of these many policies allow citizenship to be conferred just because I could come in, legally or illegally? As far I know, there has been no change in immigration law and enforcement has only gotten stronger, even duing the Obama administration.
    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" ~ Epicurus

  13. #988
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,029
    GVChamp,

    they need to provide an address and have regular check-ins with the immigration authorities and need to show up for their asylum hearings. If they fail any of that, then there's no path to citizenship for them, ever, and they get deported as soon as ICE finds them.
    OK, that’s your policy recommendation.
    Can we now please get back to what’s actually supported by either of the two main political parties?
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  14. #989
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,572
    Quote Originally Posted by antimony View Post
    Which one of these many policies allow citizenship to be conferred just because I could come in, legally or illegally? As far I know, there has been no change in immigration law and enforcement has only gotten stronger, even duing the Obama administration.
    Enforcement is entirely dependent on what class you fall into. If you're a DREAMER, you have deferred action and a work permit. So if you came to the US when you were 16 years old in 2006, you were given semi-legal status by Presidential fiat. The Obama adminstration wanted to expand this dramatically, and would've given something north of 6 million people semi-permanent legal status.

    Keep in mind that while this program only officially covered people prior to 2007, this is still an ongoing issue. The people who come in during 2018 cannot be deported if they don't show up to deportation hearings, which they have little incentive to do if the President in 2028 is then going to DACA everyone who arrived prior to 2018. But that entirely depends on whether the sitting President feels it is in his/her political interest to do so.

    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    GVChamp,



    OK, that’s your policy recommendation.
    Can we now please get back to what’s actually supported by either of the two main political parties?
    That's what we were talking about, and I am still trying to figure out if there is any intention to deport families that make it across the border, or if we are just going to take the Democrats at their word when they say they are only going to deport criminals (alleged? charged? convicted?)

    I don't have much of a political say.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  15. #990
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    8,996
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post

    That's what we were talking about, and I am still trying to figure out if there is any intention to deport families that make it across the border, or if we are just going to take the Democrats at their word when they say they are only going to deport criminals (alleged? charged? convicted?)

    I don't have much of a political say.
    That's an easy one. It depends if they were just trying to sneak across the border, or if they crossed to apply for asylum. Illegal crosser's can be deported immediately. Those seeking asylum are not illegal and are not deported unless they cannot make their case before a court. Depending on where they come from they may be granted resident status immediately. An example being Cubans. If they touch dry American soil then they are automatically granted asylum
    Its called Tourist Season. So why can't we shoot them?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 2017 American Political Scene
    By YellowFever in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 2571
    Last Post: 29 Dec 17,, 21:34
  2. Lotsa great American political news out there today...
    By Bluesman in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 27 Aug 10,, 20:00
  3. American political duplication between Riyadh and Israel
    By ahmed in forum International Politics
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 29 Apr 07,, 22:06

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

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