Two issues, immigration and abortion were the GOP's rallying cry. They never really wanted to resolve the problems, they simply wanted them as planks in a platform to elect candidates and raise money. SGman was right, they should have passed the immigration reforms in 2013. The proverbial dog chasing the car; what the hell do you do once you catch it?
The democrats had no chance in the mid-terms, none. Then the Supreme Court stuck their nose in the Roe v Wade and turned them on it's ear. Then trump exerted his influence and helped elect some of the dumbest candidates on the face of this earth in primaries, and now who knows?
I was surprised by your article Steve. No mention the plane full of immigrants came from Texas, because that moves it full on into little more than the freak show in a carnival. To top it off, your buddy EE is having the ring master DeSantis on his program. I won't be listening.
The bigger miss, in my humble opinion, was Charlie Sykes flat out blew you out of the water. His article today showcased trump going full-on Q. Not saying you weren't critical, but the very idea the goof was wearing a Q pin and touting the "coming storm" is front page news. Credibility was lost years ago, but this takes the maga-master into a wholly new dimension. Rod Sterling would be proud.
I can agree that politics and most politicians suck. I can't agree that illegal migrants are the most innocent among us. While they are not all ogres, there is plenty of criminality and other evils in their ranks. Relocating a few thousand of them to sanctuary states is a serious effort to make the immigrant invasion real to those who either ignore it or support it.
The USA should adopt and enforce laws to make immigration a net positive - not a social justice exercise. No chain migration, no welfare programs for imported unemployed and unemployables. We have enough of those who are natural born citizens.
It's not really a serious effort to make immigration issues (invasion is a term of war, stop calling it that) "real", as those states are already dealing with the issue. It's solely a way to grandstand and publicize himself to the GOP: there's no effort to actually advance solutions, or push for reform.
Don't take politicians seriously when they don't advance real solutions to problems.
"random drug testing of employees is an unwarranted invasion of privacy"
synonyms: violation · infringement · interruption · disturbance · disruption · breach · infraction · intrusion into · encroachment on · trespass on · obtrusion into · interference with
The sanctuary states and cities are not dealing with the issue. They continue to tolerate it because, with the exception of California, the influx is relatively small and nothing like what the border states, southern states and rural states experience. Governor DeSantis and Governor Abbott do advance a simple solution. Stop letting them in. The asylum claims are mostly BS and the phonies could be immediately weeded out with a checklist of the requirements for asylum. I do not believe any illegals from more than two or three countries in Central and South American can qualify. Those flocking to the southern border from the Caribbean, Europe, Asia and Africa generally have no legitimate claim for asylum or have already escaped whatever they were fleeing from by the time they reach Mexico.
The very first definition you provided (and the way y'all talk about it): thank you.
I did make an argument: that this was nothing but cruel grandstanding moment for DeSantis, not designed to actually advance any policies or reforms but instead to continue to raise his profile with those who want cruelty.
"Stop letting them in" is not a real solution: it's the antithesis of reform, and ultimately just putting your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes, and ignoring those that claim asylum. All that will do is prevent any reforms from occurring.
Asylum seekers (and everyone in fact) has a right to due process under the law. The majority may be denied: they still have a right to have their cases be heard. So if you were actually interested in a real solution, it'd involve improving the system to make it more efficient, have it work more timely, and perhaps even be accessible outside of the USA. That's going to take resources: more money for better application systems, more judges to hear and process cases.
This can be applied to our immigration system in general: make it easier to apply, make processing more timely and efficient, and have it be possible outside of the USA - at consulates, or immigration application centers, etc...
"Stop letting them in" is the perfect solution. If they are not here, they are not our problem. If they think they are some of however many (it was about 70,000) are allotted asylum annually in the USA, they can make their case from whatever free country they are in. The USA has no official list of oppressive countries, but we could have one if the great pronoun crisis were not all consuming. It's up to them to prove their case. The "judges" you speak of are not really judges. They are unionized federal employees who are constantly whining about their workload. If they were true professionals, they would hire clerks to screen out the fraudulent requests - a simple chore based on objective criteria.
My understanding is that immigrant visas may be applied for at embassies.
It is not a perfect solution, as it violates UN conventions and protocols regarding refugees/asylum seekers to which the United States is a signatory. We are legally obligated to do so.
And a refugee can be from anywhere provided they are being subjected to persecution.
"Hiring clerks" falls under the "need more resources" banner bud.
Fire a few of the whiny union "judges" and hire clerks, bud. Persecution that supports an asylum claim must be a systematic governmental policy. The UN can get their investigators from Cuba, China, Russia, Venezuela and Pakistan (all members of the Human Rights Commission)
Are you willing to put any blame on the GOP for not advancing the Gang of Eight's immigration reform bill in 2013? It passed the Senate, but Boehner didn't give it a vote in the House.
I think Dems are more than ready for comprehensive immigration reform, and that the GOP is disinterested in actually reforming the system. When there's actually enough votes to get something done then I imagine it will be done - and likely not while the GOP's only idea is "Build the Wall".
A good question: what is the real state of the economy, and what factors that can actually be controlled are playing into any issues? If it's a global-level issue, then it's not a Democrat issue beyond just being the majority at the time.
Also: why didn't you address the cruelty behind DeSantis's actions?
Two issues, immigration and abortion were the GOP's rallying cry. They never really wanted to resolve the problems, they simply wanted them as planks in a platform to elect candidates and raise money. SGman was right, they should have passed the immigration reforms in 2013. The proverbial dog chasing the car; what the hell do you do once you catch it?
The democrats had no chance in the mid-terms, none. Then the Supreme Court stuck their nose in the Roe v Wade and turned them on it's ear. Then trump exerted his influence and helped elect some of the dumbest candidates on the face of this earth in primaries, and now who knows?
I was surprised by your article Steve. No mention the plane full of immigrants came from Texas, because that moves it full on into little more than the freak show in a carnival. To top it off, your buddy EE is having the ring master DeSantis on his program. I won't be listening.
The bigger miss, in my humble opinion, was Charlie Sykes flat out blew you out of the water. His article today showcased trump going full-on Q. Not saying you weren't critical, but the very idea the goof was wearing a Q pin and touting the "coming storm" is front page news. Credibility was lost years ago, but this takes the maga-master into a wholly new dimension. Rod Sterling would be proud.
I can agree that politics and most politicians suck. I can't agree that illegal migrants are the most innocent among us. While they are not all ogres, there is plenty of criminality and other evils in their ranks. Relocating a few thousand of them to sanctuary states is a serious effort to make the immigrant invasion real to those who either ignore it or support it.
The USA should adopt and enforce laws to make immigration a net positive - not a social justice exercise. No chain migration, no welfare programs for imported unemployed and unemployables. We have enough of those who are natural born citizens.
It's not really a serious effort to make immigration issues (invasion is a term of war, stop calling it that) "real", as those states are already dealing with the issue. It's solely a way to grandstand and publicize himself to the GOP: there's no effort to actually advance solutions, or push for reform.
Don't take politicians seriously when they don't advance real solutions to problems.
There you go again. Trying to change the language instead of presenting an argument.
in·va·sion
[inˈvāZHən]
NOUN
an instance of invading a country or region with an armed force:
"in 1546 England had to be defended from invasion" · [more]
synonyms:occupation · conquering · capture · seizure · annexation · annexing · takeover · appropriation · expropriation · arrogation · overrunning · overwhelming · storming · attack · incursion · offensive · assailing · assault · onslaught · foray · sortie · raid
an incursion by a large number of people or things into a place or sphere of activity:
"stadium guards are preparing for another invasion of fans"
synonyms:influx · inundation · inrush · rush · flood · torrent · deluge · stream · avalanche
an unwelcome intrusion into another's domain:
"random drug testing of employees is an unwarranted invasion of privacy"
synonyms: violation · infringement · interruption · disturbance · disruption · breach · infraction · intrusion into · encroachment on · trespass on · obtrusion into · interference with
The sanctuary states and cities are not dealing with the issue. They continue to tolerate it because, with the exception of California, the influx is relatively small and nothing like what the border states, southern states and rural states experience. Governor DeSantis and Governor Abbott do advance a simple solution. Stop letting them in. The asylum claims are mostly BS and the phonies could be immediately weeded out with a checklist of the requirements for asylum. I do not believe any illegals from more than two or three countries in Central and South American can qualify. Those flocking to the southern border from the Caribbean, Europe, Asia and Africa generally have no legitimate claim for asylum or have already escaped whatever they were fleeing from by the time they reach Mexico.
The very first definition you provided (and the way y'all talk about it): thank you.
I did make an argument: that this was nothing but cruel grandstanding moment for DeSantis, not designed to actually advance any policies or reforms but instead to continue to raise his profile with those who want cruelty.
"Stop letting them in" is not a real solution: it's the antithesis of reform, and ultimately just putting your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes, and ignoring those that claim asylum. All that will do is prevent any reforms from occurring.
Asylum seekers (and everyone in fact) has a right to due process under the law. The majority may be denied: they still have a right to have their cases be heard. So if you were actually interested in a real solution, it'd involve improving the system to make it more efficient, have it work more timely, and perhaps even be accessible outside of the USA. That's going to take resources: more money for better application systems, more judges to hear and process cases.
This can be applied to our immigration system in general: make it easier to apply, make processing more timely and efficient, and have it be possible outside of the USA - at consulates, or immigration application centers, etc...
"Stop letting them in" is the perfect solution. If they are not here, they are not our problem. If they think they are some of however many (it was about 70,000) are allotted asylum annually in the USA, they can make their case from whatever free country they are in. The USA has no official list of oppressive countries, but we could have one if the great pronoun crisis were not all consuming. It's up to them to prove their case. The "judges" you speak of are not really judges. They are unionized federal employees who are constantly whining about their workload. If they were true professionals, they would hire clerks to screen out the fraudulent requests - a simple chore based on objective criteria.
My understanding is that immigrant visas may be applied for at embassies.
It is not a perfect solution, as it violates UN conventions and protocols regarding refugees/asylum seekers to which the United States is a signatory. We are legally obligated to do so.
And a refugee can be from anywhere provided they are being subjected to persecution.
"Hiring clerks" falls under the "need more resources" banner bud.
Fire a few of the whiny union "judges" and hire clerks, bud. Persecution that supports an asylum claim must be a systematic governmental policy. The UN can get their investigators from Cuba, China, Russia, Venezuela and Pakistan (all members of the Human Rights Commission)
on the case if they object to USA policy.
Are you willing to put any blame on the GOP for not advancing the Gang of Eight's immigration reform bill in 2013? It passed the Senate, but Boehner didn't give it a vote in the House.
I think Dems are more than ready for comprehensive immigration reform, and that the GOP is disinterested in actually reforming the system. When there's actually enough votes to get something done then I imagine it will be done - and likely not while the GOP's only idea is "Build the Wall".
A good question: what is the real state of the economy, and what factors that can actually be controlled are playing into any issues? If it's a global-level issue, then it's not a Democrat issue beyond just being the majority at the time.
Also: why didn't you address the cruelty behind DeSantis's actions?
Addendum: if this brochure was really provided...
https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1571839108795727873