Crisis, really?

I chuckle at the focus on whether the situation on the border is a "crisis" or not. The left and media claims it is a fake or fabricated one, but isn't a crisis an opinion? Me running out of beer on a Saturday could be a crisis. Over the last decade there have been plenty of political crisis', and as was famously stated "Never let a crisis go to waste", right?

Since 1975, there have 522 death (approx) from mass shootings and the gun crisis never gets questioned or labelled a fake crisis yet in 44 years only 522 deaths. That is less than 12 a year. I bet illegal immigrants cause more than that a year. According to US statistics, in 2017, 2028 homicides were committed that year alone by illegals. So 522 deaths over 44 years does warrant a crisis label but over 2,000 in one year does not? That does not consider the financial burden on social services or the illegal contraband brought into this country through our porous border.

But the left's answer is to say this isn't a crisis. Does it matter if you call it one? Its an attention diverter, that is all. Make the arguement about whether it is a crisis or not. That is better than actually addressing the problem because it is a classic approach. Take an arguement you can't win and make it about something else that you can.

The media has a narrative to push. Drug interdiction at the southern border is the crisis they don’t want to report on it seems.
Only poor migrants who caravaned up through Mexico to get here. Wonder who financed that march to our southern border? 🤔 maybe the media needs to invest some time in finding that out.

The President declaring a national emergency bypassing Congressional authority over the budget is a big deal.

A national emergency is not an opinion. It is a judgment call and a very serious one. In a Constitutional Republic it is a big deal to bypass the authority bestowed on Congress in Article I. This is especially true when you mobilize US troops on American soil.

With Katrina or something it makes sense. Also a national emergency should not b defined as a last resort in a budgetary negotiation.

Beyond the very legitimate issue of immigration reform and border security, any president who lowers the threshold for this type of budgetary debate to be labeled a national emergency is setting the country up to have a neutered Congress. Not that Congress has not done that to itself in many ways. The executive, legislative and judiciary branches need to cooperatively restrain each other to ensure individual liberty is not taken away briskly.

The border, secured as it is today, is a national crisis according to the President. Well Hell the state of our bomber fleet and fighter squadrons due to sequestration was probably more of a national emergency and risk to our safety than the border.

If the FDA can't bring food inspectors back to work, we will see a health national emergency pretty quick. The economic impact of Federal workers and agencies shut down--big issue. Contractors directly and indirectly receiving funds helps keep the wheels of this economy moving. Not all of it--but a lot.

A year ago Trump was offered 20 billion for the wall in exchange for DACA. He didn't deal. He double down and wanted to end chain migration and make it harder for folks to come America and didn't take the money.

There should be a concrete, no pun intended, plan of how to secure the border in a realistic and practical fashion.

National emergencies should not have to be debated or used as back pocket threat. Especially a threat that could chip away even further at free society.

He turned 20 billion.

There is nothing immoral about borders. Imminent domain and denying access to the Rio Grande--immoral. Sometimes imminent domain is necessary but still awful.

A realistic, detailed thoughtful plan needs to developed. Whether it is steel slats or concrete, how long it actually would be.

Heck use the army corp of engineers working with career DHS staff to assess the area and determine how and where wall/fencing makes sense, what else we need and put that plan before Congress and the American people (nothing classified of course to the public). And' lets go from here.

Spouting about it does nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UKHistory

The President declaring a national emergency bypassing Congressional authority over the budget is a big deal.

A national emergency is not an opinion. It is a judgment call and a very serious one. In a Constitutional Republic it is a big deal to bypass the authority bestowed on Congress in Article I. This is especially true when you mobilize US troops on American soil.

With Katrina or something it makes sense. Also a national emergency should not b defined as a last resort in a budgetary negotiation.

Beyond the very legitimate issue of immigration reform and border security, any president who lowers the threshold for this type of budgetary debate to be labeled a national emergency is setting the country up to have a neutered Congress. Not that Congress has not done that to itself in many ways. The executive, legislative and judiciary branches need to cooperatively restrain each other to ensure individual liberty is not taken away briskly.

The border, secured as it is today, is a national crisis according to the President. Well Hell the state of our bomber fleet and fighter squadrons due to sequestration was probably more of a national emergency and risk to our safety than the border.

If the FDA can't bring food inspectors back to work, we will see a health national emergency pretty quick. The economic impact of Federal workers and agencies shut down--big issue. Contractors directly and indirectly receiving funds helps keep the wheels of this economy moving. Not all of it--but a lot.

A year ago Trump was offered 20 billion for the wall in exchange for DACA. He didn't deal. He double down and wanted to end chain migration and make it harder for folks to come America and didn't take the money.

There should be a concrete, no pun intended, plan of how to secure the border in a realistic and practical fashion.

National emergencies should not have to be debated or used as back pocket threat. Especially a threat that could chip away even further at free society.

He turned 20 billion.

There is nothing immoral about borders. Imminent domain and denying access to the Rio Grande--immoral. Sometimes imminent domain is necessary but still awful.

A realistic, detailed thoughtful plan needs to developed. Whether it is steel slats or concrete, how long it actually would be.

Heck use the army corp of engineers working with career DHS staff to assess the area and determine how and where wall/fencing makes sense, what else we need and put that plan before Congress and the American people (nothing classified of course to the public). And' lets go from here.

Spouting about it does nothing.

---

The question wasn't National Emergency. It was crisis. This is not a manufactured crisis, at least no more than say Gun Control or Climate change. Both have been labelled as being a Crisis in the past. Health Care was also a "Crisis" although many like myself were happy with the previous system where I took care of myself and my family. However I never tried to poo poo it as a "manufactured crisis". Supposedly we also have a "student loan crisis". And lets not forget the "Russian meddling crisis". In fact under Obama, we had a HUMANITARIAN CRISIS at the southern boarder. But Trumps crisis is manufactured.

Obama gives a nice speech on Immigration Obstruction. Wonder if he would reprocess that speech and deliver it to the Democrats now?

The crisis to me is that people will follow a political party's stance and allow that to be their own opinion.

I will add concerning the National Emergency aspect that I am not a fan of bypassing the Congress. I wasn't a fan of when Democrats changed the rules and procedures to bypass GOP obstruction. I wasn't a fan when Barach Obama pulled out his famous pen concerning DOCA. I've only noticed concern when Trump suggests he could do it, and it is a negotiating ploy. Personally Im glad to see a Republican grow some balls and stoop to the level of the left.

The huge majority of drugs transported from Mexico comes via private vehicles and tractor trailers at legal ports of entry. That according to the most recent national Drug threat assessment.

That would be where to concentrate any effort.

On the matter of crime, rather than type let me just paste this..

"In the last two years, ICE officers made 266,000 arrests of aliens with criminal records including those charged or convicted of 100,000 assaults, 30,000 sex crimes, and 4,000 violent killings." ..President Trump

The numbers need context. Yes, during the last two years, ICE officials arrested 266,000 people. But Trump’s numbers overstate criminal activity by immigrants in two ways.

ICE reports note that each arrest "may represent multiple criminal charges and convictions." A single person could have committed multiple crimes.

"When they publish all convictions, they are duplicating criminal activity and inflating the numbers," said Randy Capps, director of research for U.S. programs at the Migration Policy Institute.

The Pew Research Center made the same point: "The total number of charges and convictions is greater than the total number of arrestees," the center noted in a February 2018 report.

It’s also worth highlighting that Trump spoke of both charges and convictions. By folding them together, the numbers look bigger, but a charge doesn’t mean that a person is guilty. Plus, ICE also notes that past convictions get included in each year’s tally. So for recidivists, the convictions pile up.

How large a difference might that make?

It depends on the crime. For assaults in 2018, the ICE annual report has 20,766 charges, compared to 29,766 convictions. The two are nearly equal and if only convictions counted, the figures would fall by nearly half. But for homicide, charges number 387, while convictions are 1,641 — not nearly as much of a difference.

It is worth noting that the majority of the ICE arrests take place away from the border, and the high number of people arrested who have criminal records has a lot to do with where ICE encounters most immigrants. An analysis by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a data project at Syracuse University, found that in 2018, 69 percent were handed over directly by prisons or jails after completing their sentences.

A 2018 report from ICE gave a full view of the crimes tied to immigrants. Traffic violations, drug use, immigration law violations and assault topped the list.

Politfact.com

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingcat

ICE reports note that each arrest "may represent multiple criminal charges and convictions." A single person could have committed multiple crimes.

"When they publish all convictions, they are duplicating criminal activity and inflating the numbers," said Randy Capps, director of research for U.S. programs at the Migration Policy Institute.
Politfact.com

---

So if one illegal alien rapes 3 people, robs 6 people and kills 2 people, you think we should report that as only one "crime" by an illegal alien? How is it in any way misleading to say that 11 violent crimes were committed and add it to the total as 11 crimes?


Also, is it really the argument of the left that ICE gets its hands on most illegals when they are released from jails, having been arrested and often convicted of crimes, and that is distorting the numbers? You sure they want to make that argument?

If this is the best argument against Trump's numbers on illegal alien crime, they are in big trouble. Seriously, they need to think twice before this becomes their talking points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CitizenBBN

So if one illegal alien rapes 3 people, robs 6 people and kills 2 people, you think we should report that as only one "crime" by an illegal alien? How is it in any way misleading to say that 11 violent crimes were committed and add it to the total as 11 crimes?


Also, is it really the argument of the left that ICE gets its hands on most illegals when they are released from jails, having been arrested and often convicted of crimes, and that is distorting the numbers? You sure they want to make that argument?

If this is the best argument against Trump's numbers on illegal alien crime, they are in big trouble. Seriously, they need to think twice before this becomes their talking points.

---

So if one illegal alien is charged with three immigration offenses, gets caught twice with pot and has several outstanding traffic violations, you think we should report that as multiple crimes and present it as being committed by multiple illegal aliens..just to win a political argument?

To say that the numbers are drastically skewed is not left leaning. It is the truth. but that's never what matters here. I am not left but more to the middle as a fairly conservative Democrat but despite your claims to the contrary you are solidly right wing. The difference is, I do not intend that as an insult. You are not so kind on this forum.

I have found Politfact to be extremely fair in their reporting and facts. And when fact checking, they do not go easy on the other side of the spectrum either.

You know better, and you also know the numbers are exaggerated as well. And I also believe your argument to lack sincerity and to be just a bellicose attempt to continue to wear people down who try to participate here as not Trump loyalists.

I have no more desire to argue, but I will look at any facts to the contrary and consider them.
You have offered none.
In this instance I could however post links from strictly conservative leaning media sources that say the virtually the same thing.

I'll leave it at that. And for the record I did not attack anyone or any opinion here. But I posted what I consider a non biased, fact based report. Not a biased editorial.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CitizenBBN

So if one illegal alien rapes 3 people, robs 6 people and kills 2 people, you think we should report that as only one "crime" by an illegal alien? How is it in any way misleading to say that 11 violent crimes were committed and add it to the total as 11 crimes?


Also, is it really the argument of the left that ICE gets its hands on most illegals when they are released from jails, having been arrested and often convicted of crimes, and that is distorting the numbers? You sure they want to make that argument?

If this is the best argument against Trump's numbers on illegal alien crime, they are in big trouble. Seriously, they need to think twice before this becomes their talking points.

---

So if a fence stops one multiple rapist, isn't that a good thing? I mean nab one illegal and prevent 3 rapes, sounds economical

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingcat

To say that the numbers are drastically skewed is not left leaning. It is the truth. but that's never what matters here. I am not left but more to the middle as a fairly conservative Democrat but despite your claims to the contrary you are solidly right wing. The difference is, I do not intend that as an insult. You are not so kind on this forum.

It is a constant defense of everything Trump and constant condemnation of anything remotely considered democratic. I have found Politico to be extremely fair in their reporting and facts. And when fact checking, they do not go easy on the other side of the spectrum either.

You know better, and you also know the numbers are exaggerated as well. And I also believe your argument to lack sincerity and to be just a bellicose attempt to continue to wear people down who try to participate here.

I have no more desire to argue, but I will look at any facts to the contrary and consider them.
You have offered none.
Just the same old rhetoric and lack of respect for any opinion other than your own. In this instance I could however posted links from strictly conservative leaning sites that say the same thing.

I'll leave it at that. And for the record I did not attack anyone or any opinion here. But I posted what I consider a non biased, fact based report. Not a biased editorial.

---

Who defended Trump? I did read a single post defending him. None. You consistantly make this claim despite it rarely being accurate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doc

Who defended Trump? I did read a single post defending him. None. You consistantly make this claim despite it rarely being accurate.

---

Chuck defended Trump and made light of my post.

Doc I have seen you disagree with conservatives before I admit. On abortion and other matters you have maintained a middle of the road stance. I do the same to both left and right myself.

But you aren't being genuine like the Doc I know when you say this forum is not basically dedicated to defending the President. Or perhaps as open minded as usual.

I think the world of all you guys, but both sides become entrenched and surrounded by talking points that serve their established opinions. And then when an opposing view is presented it is attacked without merit. it just so happens this forum over the years has put up its own wall making it difficult for any dissenting opinion to garner respect. It's not that they are always wrong, it's that they are never well received on anything of political importance.

There has never been a mind changed on anything that I can recall.

I think back to what a man called Preacher Lindsey once told a congregation who informed him he was biblically(?) mistaken, because they all understood something just alike. He replied to them, "no you all misunderstand it just alike"

That happens to all of us at times when we congregate

Anyway, it's no big deal I guess.

P.S. On second thought there was the eight years previous to this administration which was dedicated to condemning President OBama.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingcat

To say that the numbers are drastically skewed is not left leaning. It is the truth. but that's never what matters here. I am not left but more to the middle as a fairly conservative Democrat but despite your claims to the contrary you are solidly right wing. The difference is, I do not intend that as an insult. You are not so kind on this forum.

I have found Politfact to be extremely fair in their reporting and facts. And when fact checking, they do not go easy on the other side of the spectrum either.

You know better, and you also know the numbers are exaggerated as well. And I also believe your argument to lack sincerity and to be just a bellicose attempt to continue to wear people down who try to participate here as not Trump loyalists.

I have no more desire to argue, but I will look at any facts to the contrary and consider them.
You have offered none.
In this instance I could however post links from strictly conservative leaning media sources that say the virtually the same thing.

I'll leave it at that. And for the record I did not attack anyone or any opinion here. But I posted what I consider a non biased, fact based report. Not a biased editorial.

---

I didn't attack your opinion, and have never directly called you anything, despite you having pigeon holed me more than once.

No, the numbers aren't "skewed". If X number of rapes and murders and robberies are committed by illegal aliens, that is a statement of fact, and it doesn't make someone less raped or dead or robbed if it happens that 11 of those or 15 of those are by one person. We still let that person in and those crimes happened.

it's not exactly a surprise either, since something like 80% of crime in this country is committed by someone already convicted of a crime. It's just the same for illegals as for citizens. no real news there.

So your supposition is that if say Chicago had 500 murders in a year related to gangs and drugs, that it's skewing the numbers if we said that without mentioning that the 500 murders were committed by less than 500 separate people? that's silly.

Is what you cited factual? Yes. The problem is it also is irrelevant. it doesnt' in any way undermine or "de-skew" the other facts it addressed. NO one ever claimed that every illegal alien is a criminal, or that even a majority or significant minority of them are MS13 members.

That doesn't change the sum total of economic and criminal damage done, and it conveniently ignores the key point: that having a legal, organized path for immigration would ALLOW those other folks in while STOPPING the obvious threats and criminals. That's the whole goal of having an immigration law in the first place, picking and choosing who you allow in based on things like their criminal record.

I dont' have any "contrary" facts to present, b/c what you presented is in no way "contrary" to the facts already listed. it is a valid point, but not one that changes the policy conclusions whatsoever.


Now, as for your attack on me as "right wing", despite your claims I am not "right wing". I'm sorry if as a Libertarian I generally side with conservatives, but that's b/c the GOP, for all its many faults is still generally closer to the ideals of this nation's founding and goals. I side with free minds, free markets and a free society, and since leftism by definition abhors those things and the Democratic Party is lurching so hard left Mcgovern is spinning, that's where I will fall in these discussions.

What you don't see of course is where I fall on social issues, b/c we just dont' discuss them here very much. Socially I'd be run out of the "right wing" on a rail. Hell, I vacation in a town that is a bastion of gay rights, loose consumption of recreational everything, and is the least judgmental place you'll find. It's just that we don't discuss those things much on here.

But yes on economics and questions of government power I'm somewhere past most in the GOP b/c I actually believe in limited goverment, in the notion that individuals should be free and equal in opportunity but not in outcome, etc. On foreign policy I am very non-Libertarian from a party standpoint b/c I am a student of realpolitik, but in general I am very reluctant to put our troops in harm's way without justification b/c of the losses my family suffered due to those actions and b/c in general we squander, not increase, our national wealth to do so.



The truth of this debate is that for 40 years we have refused to get a handle on basic immigration policy, and it's largely due to the various political angles of the two parties trying to compete for future votes of certain demographic groups. Trump's first proposal wasn't a bad one, but politically both sides have things to gain by makign the other hold the bag, so here we sit at stalemate.

BTW, I was and still am a big proponent of LEGAL immigration. I believe the brain drain effect where the US attracts a lot of the best minds and most ambitious people from all over the world has been a huge key to our success. I believe in immigration, even for entry level work as well as for doctors and professors.

But I don't support a system where the Sinaloa cartel is choosing who comes across our border, and that's a lot of what is going on today.

Also, immigration prior to the welfare state was very different. Families came here and had to contribute and work up. Now economically many of these families are a net drain on the US system due to the high amounts of money we pour into health care, education, etc. Add on top how much of their money they send back to Mexico instead of spending here, and it's a pretty big hit.

It wasn't that way when families came to Ellis island. Not a lot of money went back home, and families didn't have a welfare state to rely on so they got to work fast and built functioning communities and contributed. and a LOT of immigrants still do that today, and they work hard, but it's getting worse and worse as time goes on and we open up the welfare state to non-citizens.

California, already heading to bankruptcy, is now going to fund health care for illegal immigrants. that's a huge cost. Many of them will work hard and contribute, but even among those many won't contribute enough to compensate for those costs, and many others will not even do that much.

So it's a different situation than it was even 30-40 years ago. Now those costs are higher, and combined with the drug problems, the gang/cartel problems, the child trafficing and other crimes, it seems clear we need an ORGANIZED approach to letting people into the country. Not to stop them coming in, we NEED immigration labor as we grow economically or we'll be in huge trouble, but we need to make sure people coming in are here to work and contribute and not run heroin or live off the welfare state.

That doesn't seem too much to ask.

Pigeon holing?

Im talking directly to you just as I always have. This is a barber shop after all. Heck there's only a couple of us here.

And Im not angry with you at all Chuck. As a matter of fact, your post above is a lot nicer in retrospect than when I first read by the way. I am sorry.
When I am serious I come across that way maybe, but Im not the angry type honestly. Not over politics certainly. I know how entrenched folks get in their beliefs.

I am saying that in the political realm I honestly do not believe there is a post I have made or a thought I have brought forward that you have not picked apart and or ridiculed. Sometimes that's expected, but in this particular situation (and some others) I didnt come to attack Trump with just anything i could find nor anyone's differing opinion here.
But to contribute to the dialogue with a widely held, and somewhat at least bipartisan and "alternate" view on the situation.

Which then is labeled as all the left can muster.
I take stuff that as being directed at me personally. And I do get defensive, but like I said, not angry.

And if you get toasted and need me to drive to Lexington and take you home, by all means I will do it. (for gas money)
Doc is too far away but I do have some family down there.

But like I inferred above, salvos like..

"So if one illegal alien rapes 3 people, robs 6 people and kills 2 people, you think we should report that as only one "crime" by an illegal alien? How is it in any way misleading to say that 11 violent crimes were committed and add it to the total as 11 crimes?" are as misleading as when a president chooses not to clarify the fact that it in no way represents the number of immigrants crashing through our borders waving guns and drunk on tequila.

So likewise, if one illegal alien is charged with three immigration offenses, gets caught twice with pot and has several outstanding traffic violations, do you think we should report that as multiple crimes and present it as being committed by multiple illegal aliens..just to score politically?

Since we know the crime rate among illegal immigrants is under the national average, the number of them becomes the issue. And we have a right to expect the truth from our president when opposed to another duly elected branch of government

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingcat

Chuck defended Trump and made light of my post.

Doc I have seen you disagree with conservatives before I admit. On abortion and other matters you have maintained a middle of the road stance. I do the same to both left and right myself.

But you aren't being genuine like the Doc I know when you say this forum is not basically dedicated to defending the President. Or perhaps as open minded as usual.

I think the world of all you guys, but both sides become entrenched and surrounded by talking points that serve their established opinions. And then when an opposing view is presented it is attacked without merit. it just so happens this forum over the years has put up its own wall making it difficult for any dissenting opinion to garner respect. It's not that they are always wrong, it's that they are never well received on anything of political importance.

There has never been a mind changed on anything that I can recall.

I think back to what a man called Preacher Lindsey once told a congregation who informed him he was biblically(?) mistaken, because they all understood something just alike. He replied to them, "no you all misunderstand it just alike"

That happens to all of us at times when we congregate

Anyway, it's no big deal I guess.

P.S. On second thought there was the eight years previous to this administration which was dedicated to condemning President OBama.

---

I have seen everybody on this board criticize Trump. Everybody. I have also seen support of his policies, which is what was done above. Curisiously I've yet to see you take a stance in support of anything Trump has done or supported. Like many liberals, anything Trump is bad.

There is no question the posters here lean conservative. Should we change our opinions and beliefs just so its 50:50? Having a conservative point of view and defending Trump are two different things. I defend his policies that align with mine. No different than being critical of liberal policies despite that making me a racist in the mind of many. My opinion, views and beliefs are what they are and I will support them. That previous 8 year period wasn't about condemning Obama, but rather his policies. Policies that were liberal and very much against my own. That is neither condemning the person or putting up a wall to prevent opposing opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kingcat

Since we know the crime rate among illegal immigrants is under the national average, the number of them becomes the issue. And we have a right to expect the truth from our president when opposed to another duly elected branch of government

---

No, we actually don't know that. What we know is that ILLEGAL aliens, or immigrants or undocumented worker ...people who entered this country illegally, have a 100% crime rate. Each and every one of them committed a crime when they entered this country illegally

EDIT: I lost power last night and couldnt finish this post..


Pigeon holing Chuck?

Im talking directly to you just as I always have. This is a barber shop. Heck there's only a couple of us here.

And Im not angry with you at all. As a matter of fact, your post above is a lot nicer in retrospect than when I first read by the way. I am sorry.
When I am serious I come across that way maybe, but Im not the angry type honestly.

I am saying that in the political realm I honestly do not believe there is a post I have made or a thought I have brought forward that you have not picked apart and or ridiculed. Sometimes thats expected, but in this particular situation (and some others) I didnt come to attack Trump with just anything i could find nor anyone's differing opinion here.
But to contribute to the dialogue with a widely held, and somewhat at least bipartisan and "alternate" view on the situation.

Which then is labled as all the left can muster. I take stuff that as being directed at me personally. I do get defensive, but like I said, seldom angry.

Simply, the number of immigrants has always been the primary issue. No one has been fooled into believing we are being attacked from the Southern border or that these people are any different from immigrants from the past.

You said..

"So if one illegal alien rapes 3 people, robs 6 people and kills 2 people, you think we should report that as only one "crime" by an illegal alien? How is it in any way misleading to say that 11 violent crimes were committed and add it to the total as 11 crimes?"

I responded with''

"And if one illegal alien is charged with three immigration offenses, gets caught twice with pot and has several outstanding traffic violations, you think we should report that as multiple crimes and present it as being committed by multiple illegal aliens..just to win a political argument?

And I stand by that and the fact that the numbers were and are being termed a national crisis. Falsely, I would add.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doc

No, we actually don't know that. What we know is that ILLEGAL aliens, or immigrants or undocumented worker ...people who entered this country illegally, have a 100% crime rate. Each and every one of them committed a crime when they entered this country illegally

---

This is a fact that seems to be ignored a lot theses days

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dan_bgblue

This is a fact that seems to be ignored a lot theses days

---

Most have multiple offenses doing so. When the illegal immigration problem was a near crisis Bush acted by hiring more agents and reduced the level drastically. His actions were the appropriate and most efficient way to handle the problem. And It did just that by concentrating across the whole spectrum of immigration and means of entry into the country.

It is a problem that should be debated in Congress. And with a sky rocketing deficit acted upon in a cost efficient way that fairly represents the United States which is built upon the backs of its immigrant population

And neither party nor the President using it for political points. The world is watching and how we respond will write our history either in a positive or negative light.

You stated hiring more agents reduced the level. I agree. Likewise I agree that a physical delineation between the US and Mexico would also enhance our security. It is a mutlifactional approach. More agents, more technology and a physical barrier. Bottom line is democrats were fine with a wall a few years ago. Now they are not. Their policy is not based on what they believe but by who makes and advocates the policy. The left has no pbm spending money, wasting money on things like failed website, buying and destroying cars, giving people free stuff or "shovel ready jobs". Had a liberal suggested a wall constructed by Americans to stimulate the economy and put $$ in the hands of workers, would it be immoral?I doubt it

And in fairness, there are some on the GOP that hold the same standard of opposing anything offered by liberals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dan_bgblue

This is a fact that seems to be ignored a lot theses days

---

Not by me...but when we talk skewed statistics, this is a classic. Of course stats themselves are not skewed. They are either accurate or not, and it is how they are interpreted that is skewed

And now I,d like to apologize to Citizen. I was out of place and rushed to judge him unfairly in his response to my post above.
There is nothing more troubling to me than offending a friend unnecessarily. And in my haste to take offense I have done just that. In this instance I’ve seen the devil and he was me. :confused0053:

He is one of the members who works tirelessly to give us a forum like this and sometimes I just well, act foolishly. This was one of those times

A man my age should know better. My apologies Chuck. For that and any other time I may have done so. I have always considered you my friend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dan_bgblue

This is a fact that seems to be ignored a lot theses days

---

It is a crime. So is stealing a loaf of bread or medicine when a loved one is sick. The law, and I didn't realize, this, had listed illegal entry as a misdemeanor. Not a felony.

We have every right to determine who enters and stays (a lot of illegal immigrants enter with visas and overstay the time. Many are white and are not easily identified or profiled as potential illegals)

Families or even single men that are looking for a better way of life are not an invasion nor infestation.

We need to stop illegal immigration. We also need to fine businesses that hire folks that are not Americans.

And we need to amend the laws to have a realistic immigration policy. Tough on crime, realistic in our needs but open to people

This nation was founded by in many cases second or third born sons who were not going to receive an inheritance, religious folks looking for their own freedom but necessarily open to other different heretics, poor and needy and slaves.

If they weren't from shithole countries, they most likely were not living large where they were--or they would not have come.

Let's continue to be open to folks. Not all deserving immigrants are hot Eastern European models.