Why Is Our Government Putting People In Cages?

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[GG]

17 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

 

You're working off flawed assumptions.  They were united in the notion that the government should not be involved in the things you've listed.  They weren't united in the notion that they should be replaced with something, only that what was done was terrible, and needed to be dismantled.  Again, you're asking them to behave like Democrats.  They swept into power because the people agreed with them, that these things should be done away with.

 

 

 

 

Again, flawed assumption.  The United States was never party to the Paris Climate Accords because the last administration didn't work through the proper channels to become a signator to the treaty.  This was one more item in a list of failures of the Obama Presidency.  Ending this sham was a net positive for the American economy and for our sovereignty.

 

 

 

 

The deal was not preventing Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.  It empowered the Mullahs, who did exactly as they pleased, oppressed their people, and continued the enrichment process.  This is documented.  You'll also likely find out, over the coming months and years, that a fair portion of the cash the President illegally gave to the Mullahs made in back into his own pocket in the form of a kickbacks.

 

 

 

 

You mean that they didn't take unConstitutional action to advance an unConstitutional law?  I'm sorry we don't live in the dictatorship you wish we did.  We live in a Constitutional republic.  As such, it's good when our leaders follow the Constitution.

 

 

 

 

Again, we don't live under a dictatorship.  We have a legal system through which our policy must be processed.  DACA was a gross overstep of executive powers.  It's a good thing when the government obeys the law.  I understand you have a problem with that, but I'm not interested in living under your dystopian dictatorship.  Don't like it?  Amend the Constitution and change the law. 

 

 

 

 

Again, Republicans are not Democrats.  They don't seek top down solutions enforced at the barrel of a gun.  The goal was to dismantle the things that were bad, and to force the government back into it's proper Constitutional role.

 

IE.  the Legislature is supposed to legislate

 

 

 

 

Yes, it is the responsibility of the Legislature to legislate.  It's not the Republican's fault that the Democrats declined to do so, and instead decided to govern illegally by fiat.  Perhaps had they done their jobs properly, instead of elevating President Obama to govern by decree, they wouldn't be having this problem.

 

The Legislature is supposed to legislate.  Democrats is Congress refuse to do so because they'll lose political cover and be run out of office.  It's easier to protect their fiefdoms that way.

 

 

 

 

That's exactly what it's been like for the past 40 years or so, which is why the current President is draining the swamp.  The children are finally back in their play pens, and the adults are back in charge.

 

I know it's hard, but please do your best to enjoy this era of prosperity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's great that there's the thumbs up button now, which saves a lot of typing,

 

Essentially Whitaker is upset that US no longer wishes to go along with the feckless polite society.  That society exists to take the US down a few notches, not for them to rise up to USA's level.

[Deranged Rhino]

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

17 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

"Mother looking for work, no asylum"

I think mother was probably unhappy in her marriage and running to another man. She brought the child who couldn't say "I want to go home" hoping the kid would give her a way into the US even though she was deported once before (so prison time for her return trip). 

That's my theory anyway.

[RocCityRoller]

On 6/15/2018 at 2:40 PM, Tiberius said:

It's not the law. Stop spitting out Trump lies, makes you look like a Trump cultist 

 

It is the law, and the 20 day turnaround was implemented and enforced by Barry to force ICE's hand. Get your head out of the sand.

[row_33]

10 minutes ago, RocCityRoller said:

 

It is the law, and the 20 day turnaround was implemented and enforced by Barry to force ICE's hand. Get your head out of the sand.

 

Tibs is just a bot that comes up with pointless blather attacking common sense

 

[B-Man]

 

 

 

.

[Albwan]

1 hour ago, Deranged Rhino said:

 

The democratic party doesn't give a **** about American citizens.

[3rdnlng]

4 hours ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said:

 

Ok. While the house can work with a simple majority, the Senate requires 60 votes normally to bring a bill to vote. This does not reflect passage of the bill, as McCain showed with his cloture with the "skinny repeal" back in 2017.

 

Now, the Senate could A) find at least a partial workaround using a Reconciliation measure. This might offer a stop gap, if not true reform.

 

or B) but together a compromise that would be political poison pills to swallow by simply stonewalling. Such as, say, path to citizenship, congressional laws preventing the splitting of families, increased funding for border agents as opposed to the Wall...well, just saying no provides a bludgeon to beat the minority party with in the midterms.

 

Basically, if working together with their counterparts in the Senate (such as the compromise that was rejected, prompting the "shithole countries" incident), the Senate could propose a bill and put it in the House's court. Or, the House could work with members in the Senate to first obtain a compromise and then pass it. But, of course, this would require presidential approval, because it is doubtful enough of the disparate wings of Congress could get the two third majority.

 

Bringing something to pass in the House that dies in the Senate WOULD show obstructionism by Democrats, and that could be a rallying cry. 

I'm sorry...are you surprised that I have at least a basic understanding of legislative processes? 

 

I *am* rubbing salt in your eyes, because killing the compromise bill in the House is the best thing the Dems could ask for. It paints the Republicans as a majority that cant get it's sh*t together, the President as a man-child, and it completely relieves them of responsibility because they don't even have to meet their opposition halfway because their opposition can't stagger there themselves.

Really? Because he just tweeted that there was no point in it, and then turned to the midterms.

 

And again, his party introduces legislation in both houses.

What compromise was this?

[reddogblitz]

11 hours ago, ALF said:

Trump says GOP should 'stop wasting their time on immigration' until after midterms

 

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump said Friday Republicans should wait until after the November midterm elections to pass immigration legislation, undercutting Congress' ongoing efforts to pass a bill.

 

"Republicans should stop wasting their time on Immigration until after we elect more Senators and Congressmen/women in November," Trump tweeted. "Dems are just playing games, have no intention of doing anything to solves this decades old problem. We can pass great legislation after the Red Wave

 

 Senate and House leaders have also been trying to find a bill that would end family separations at the border.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/22/politics/trump-immigration-midterms/index.html

 

I guess W and Congress were just playing games also

 

Nobody want to do anything about this until after the election.  It's too good of a campaign issue.  then they can shelve it until the primary season ramps up in 2019.

[B-Man]

 

 

94% of the kids at the Homestead, FL shelter are unaccompanied minors, 6% were separated from their parents

 

 

.

Edited June 23, 2018 by B-Man

[Albwan]

29 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

Nobody want to do anything about this until after the election.  It's too good of a campaign issue.  then they can shelve it until the primary season ramps up in 2019.

Plus democrats are hoping that by 2020 they can manage to cut medicaid and such, then

with luck they can kill off a few million stupid poor white Americans, because hey, every bit counts.

Edited June 23, 2018 by Albwan

[PearlHowardman]

The Political Bottom Line:  

 

President Donald Trump housed illegal immigrant children in fenced areas resembling cages.  President Barack Obama housed illegal immigrant children in fenced areas resembling cages.  Whether these illegal immigrant children were unaccompanied or separated from their parents is immaterial.  Without those chain link fences there's no story here.

 

And the Obama White House wanted caging illegal immigrant children "kept quiet" and the MSM mostly obliged.  But now that Trump did what Obama did the Democrats and MSM are freaking out.  But now the histrionics of the Democrats and MSM is starting to resemble AstroTurf.  This happens after a few days when things settle down and we see things for what they really are.

 

[Thurmal34]

On 6/17/2018 at 3:01 AM, OJ Tom said:

 

I'm hearing hysterical ranting from someone who is losing.

 

I’m unsure what you mean.

 

Back to the topic at hand - are you able to able to link an instance of an American child being caged due to an offense committed by his/her parent? 

 

Or were you too busy whatabouting?

[TakeYouToTasker]

6 minutes ago, Thurmal34 said:

 

I’m unsure what you mean.

 

Back to the topic at hand - are you able to able to link an instance of an American child being caged due to an offense committed by his/her parent? 

 

Or were you too busy whatabouting?

 

This isnt a very smart place to take your argument.

 

I'll give you a while to figure out why.

[keepthefaith]

1 hour ago, Thurmal34 said:

 

I’m unsure what you mean.

 

Back to the topic at hand - are you able to able to link an instance of an American child being caged due to an offense committed by his/her parent? 

 

Or were you too busy whatabouting?

 

Actually American children are detained and held by non-relatives frequently - in foster homes.  In foster homes or in group foster homes the children of some incarcerated parents are housed and their movements are restricted by courts and the supervising adults - FOR YEARS.  Even worse is that incarcerated parents can be ruled as unfit parents with no rights to resume parenting their children upon their release.  Even worse some of these kids are then adopted by the foster parents and the biological parent may then have no right to visit their children until they are adults.  The courts rule based on what they feel is best for the children. 

 

Similarly courts have determined that children entering our country illegally with adults are best supervised in relatively comfortable detention areas, not able to roam freely or unsupervised and not in a cell with the adult criminals. 

Edited June 23, 2018 by keepthefaith

[DC Tom]

17 hours ago, Thurmal34 said:

Back to the topic at hand - are you able to able to link an instance of an American child being caged due to an offense committed by his/her parent? 

 

Or were you too busy whatabouting?

 

You want a historic example without "whataboutism?"  

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

4 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

You want a historic example without "whataboutism?"  

 

I hate that term. Only people who are willing to be oblivious to hypocrisy use it.

[BringBackOrton]

4 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

I hate that term. Only people who are willing to be oblivious to hypocrisy use it.

"We need a phrase to defend when we are contradictory in our moral arguments!"

[row_33]

7 minutes ago, BringBackOrton said:

"We need a phrase to defend when we are contradictory in our moral arguments!"

 

Two wrongs don’t make a right 

 

and liberals invented the perversion of this and have held to it 98 percent of the time it’s been invoked

 

 

[B-Man]

....................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.........................

 

 

 

 

 

[Doc Brown]

13 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

I hate that term. Only people who are willing to be oblivious to hypocrisy use it.

Would "false moral equivalence" be easier for you to understand?

[PearlHowardman]

On 6/21/2018 at 5:12 PM, Deranged Rhino said:

 

 

 

 

This^

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Would "false moral equivalence" be easier for you to understand?

 

False by whose measure?

 

It's not a false moral equivalence. People that think Trump's doing something wrong, when Hussein did the EXACT SAME THING WITHOUT OUTRAGE are displaying hypocrisy.

 

Edited June 24, 2018 by joesixpack

[B-Man]

Without comment..........................

 

 

Rep. Barbara Lee accuses Trump administration of ´criminalizing´ illegal immigrants by Valerie Richardson

Original Article

[IDBillzFan]

1 hour ago, joesixpack said:

 

False by whose measure?

 

It's not a false moral equivalence. People that think Trump's doing something wrong, when Hussein did the EXACT SAME THING WITHOUT OUTRAGE are displaying hypocrisy.

 

 

It is different because you're a racist for mentioning Obama.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

19 minutes ago, B-Man said:

Without comment..........................

 

 

Rep. Barbara Lee accuses Trump administration of ´criminalizing´ illegal immigrants by Valerie Richardson

Original Article

What the ACTUAL !@#$?

 

Jesus H Christ on a cracker, what the !@#$ is wrong with these people?

 

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, joesixpack said:

 

False by whose measure?

 

It's not a false moral equivalence. People that think Trump's doing something wrong, when Hussein did the EXACT SAME THING WITHOUT OUTRAGE are displaying hypocrisy.

 

You still think Obama did the exact same thing in making it a policy to separate children from their parents when crossing the border illegally like Trump did after 37 pages?  

 

The media outrage is over the top and largely manufactured, but factually they are correct.

[3rdnlng]

18 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

You still think Obama did the exact same thing in making it a policy to separate children from their parents when crossing the border illegally like Trump did after 37 pages?  

 

The media outrage is over the top and largely manufactured, but factually they are correct.

We have an issue that has no solution without an act of Congress. Because of the Flores decision children cannot be housed with their illegal alien parents in a detention facility for more than 20 days. Trump administration was separating families because of this law (not even touching on the perils of keeping some of them with fake parent(s).) The surge in illegal crossings and requests for amnesty has overloaded our system. The administration knew that they couldn't process the children in 20 days and relocate them to family or sponsors. Now Trump has signed an EO mandating that the children stay with their parents until moved off to other family or sponsors. After 20 days it's an illegal EO and Trump knows it. Regardless of the media's attempt to keep this a shitstorm, the onus is now on Congress to do something about this. At some point in time the media either has to shut up or else they have to blame Congress.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

1 hour ago, Doc Brown said:

You still think Obama did the exact same thing in making it a policy to separate children from their parents when crossing the border illegally like Trump did after 37 pages?  

 

The media outrage is over the top and largely manufactured, but factually they are correct.

 

Hop in the wayback machine to 2014, you'll see what I'm talking about.

 

[keepthefaith]

Our laws on this matter are so convoluted.  The simplest and most effective thing to do with people who enter illegally would be to let them use the bathroom, give them some water and maybe a meal send them back to where they originated in daylight hours.  It really shouldn't be more complicated than that. 

 

 

[3rdnlng]

Well, this is well thought out. Let's hurt the Mexican restaurants and employees because Trump officials shouldn't eat a taco.

 

https://pjmedia.com/trending/npr-trump-admin-members-are-hypocrites-when-eating-at-mexican-restaurants/

 

It's come to this: according to some, people should be picking their casual dining choices based on their politics.

NPR published an opinion piece by writer Monique Truong that claims in the headline that it is "hypocrisy" for administration members who support President Trump's way of handling the long-ignored border crisis to eat at Mexican restaurants. These are people who work for the president, of course, so they are essentially being taken to task for doing their jobs.

Truong considers recent forays to Mexican food dining establishments by administration policy adviser Stephen Miller and Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen to be a "spectacle" that is "utterly galling to many Americans who object" to the recent policy of dealing with felony immigration offenders, which the president ended this week.

 

Truong acknowledges the pervasiveness of "Mexican-inspired" food in the United States. I'm from Tucson, it's not called "Mexican food" here, it's just "food." She concedes that it is now part of the "American table" but sternly lectures that we should be "appalled" that people who aren't on board with open borders and illegal immigration should choose to spend their hard-earned money at a Mexican restaurant. Her tortured logic asserts that since Mexican restaurants have "back-of-the-house" staff that "came from Mexico or Central America, with or without documents," people who oppose illegal immigration are experiencing a "disconnect" when dining at these establishments.

[Doc Brown]

39 minutes ago, joesixpack said:

 

Hop in the wayback machine to 2014, you'll see what I'm talking about.

 

No.  Go through the thread.  Unaccompanied minors illegally crossing the border is different.

1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said:

We have an issue that has no solution without an act of Congress. Because of the Flores decision children cannot be housed with their illegal alien parents in a detention facility for more than 20 days. Trump administration was separating families because of this law (not even touching on the perils of keeping some of them with fake parent(s).) The surge in illegal crossings and requests for amnesty has overloaded our system. The administration knew that they couldn't process the children in 20 days and relocate them to family or sponsors. Now Trump has signed an EO mandating that the children stay with their parents until moved off to other family or sponsors. After 20 days it's an illegal EO and Trump knows it. Regardless of the media's attempt to keep this a shitstorm, the onus is now on Congress to do something about this. At some point in time the media either has to shut up or else they have to blame Congress.

That's a good summary of it.  However, Trump just tweeted to Congress not to bother with an immigration bill until after the midterms.  It's an interesting time we live in.

[PearlHowardman]

4 hours ago, joesixpack said:

It's not a false moral equivalence. People that think Trump's doing something wrong, when Hussein did the EXACT SAME THING WITHOUT OUTRAGE are displaying hypocrisy.

 

This^

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

You still think Obama did the exact same thing in making it a policy to separate children from their parents when crossing the border illegally like Trump did after 37 pages? 

 

Separating illegal immigrant children from their illegal immigrant parents is not why this is a news item.

 

Putting illegal immigrant children in fenced areas is why this is a news item.  Both Obama and Trump did this.  No outrage when Obama did it, though.

1 hour ago, keepthefaith said:

Our laws on this matter are so convoluted.  The simplest and most effective thing to do with people who enter illegally would be to let them use the bathroom, give them some water and maybe a meal send them back to where they originated in daylight hours.  It really shouldn't be more complicated than that. 

 

You nailed it.

 

 

[3rdnlng]

24 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

No.  Go through the thread.  Unaccompanied minors illegally crossing the border is different.

That's a good summary of it.  However, Trump just tweeted to Congress not to bother with an immigration bill until after the midterms.  It's an interesting time we live in.

Trump was elected partially because of his immigration policy. He has gone a long way in fulfilling all of his promises. Immigration reform was one of his promises. The dems had been crying about DACA ever since Trump gave Congress a deadline to solve the issue. The courts stepped in and made that deadline moot. Then Trump offered the dems 2 1/2 times the amount of DACA recipients in a compromise. The dems have been running from a DACA fix ever since. They need it as an issue in the midterms and beyond. They don't want to fix it. Trump is right in saying "F" it, let's wait until after midterms when we will have more representation in the Senate, where the real hurdle lies. There's another reason too. His original deadline was overturned by the courts and there are reasons to believe that decision will be overturned. If that happens Trump will then have some meat to his new deadline.                                           

[PearlHowardman]

3 hours ago, B-Man said:

Rep. Barbara Lee accuses Trump administration of ´criminalizing´ illegal immigrants

 

[IDBillzFan]

3 hours ago, joesixpack said:

What the ACTUAL !@#$?

 

Jesus H Christ on a cracker, what the !@#$ is wrong with these people?

 

 

Funny thing is, they are convinced you're the one with the problem, not them. You're the problem to this entire situation, and if we would just do away with borders altogether, everthing would be much better for everyone.

[/dev/null]

5 hours ago, joesixpack said:

It's not a false moral equivalence. People that think Trump's doing something wrong, when Hussein did the EXACT SAME THING WITHOUT OUTRAGE are displaying hypocrisy.

But it's different because the Obama Administration with dealing with more important matters like defending one's right to pee in the toilet of their choice and filling out March Madness brackets

[Doc Brown]

8 minutes ago, PearlHowardman said:

 

This^

 

Separating illegal immigrant children from their illegal immigrant parents is not why this is a news item.

 

Putting illegal immigrant children in fenced areas is why this is a news item.  Both Obama and Trump did this.  No outrage when Obama did it, though.

 

You nailed it.

 

 

Yeah it is.  Separating children from their parents hits an emotional chord with a lot of people.  I'd much rather see the parent and child together in a detention center than separating them for an extended period of time.  I remember how afraid I was sending my son to preschool.   There was outrage by immigration activists when Obama used detaining families as a deterrent leading to them suing the administration and winning.  I agree that the media chose to ignore this story for the most part, but the outcry wouldn't have been intense because the children were at least with their parent(s).  USA Today reported in 2015 that Obama considered the same policy Trump implemented (separating parents from children as a deterrent), but thought it would look bad so they decided to just go with the "catch and release" policy.

 

6 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Trump was elected partially because of his immigration policy. He has gone a long way in fulfilling all of his promises. Immigration reform was one of his promises. The dems had been crying about DACA ever since Trump gave Congress a deadline to solve the issue. The courts stepped in and made that deadline moot. Then Trump offered the dems 2 1/2 times the amount of DACA recipients in a compromise. The dems have been running from a DACA fix ever since. They need it as an issue in the midterms and beyond. They don't want to fix it. Trump is right in saying "F" it, let's wait until after midterms when we will have more representation in the Senate, where the real hurdle lies. There's another reason too. His original deadline was overturned by the courts and there are reasons to believe that decision will be overturned. If that happens Trump will then have some meat to his new deadline.                                           

There was that televised meeting in January where Trump said after Feinstein suggested a clean DACA deal, "I would like to do that. Go ahead. I think a lot of people would like to see that, but I think we have to do DACA first."  That could be a soundbite the Dems will play leading to the midterms. 

 

Republicans are smart to make immigration a midterm issue because Democrats have lost their minds when it comes to border security.  

[IDBillzFan]

2 minutes ago, Doc Brown said:

Republicans are smart to make immigration a midterm issue because Democrats have lost their minds when it comes to border security.  

 

They haven't lost their minds so much as they have decided to side with the far, far left which is, essentially, a desire for open borders.

 

We consider that losing their minds. They consider it perfectly normal.