The proposed senate immigration bill

[BackAgain]

This is the old "as the secretary shall determine...." game of 3-card Monte, ain't it?

It sure looks like it.

 

[Slade3200]

For god's sake, Slade...we can't handle what we have now! What the Democrats are demanding would give us another million and a half a year. That's idiotic! Cities and States around the country are already pleading with Washington for billions of dollars to bail them out...money that we don't have. You want to add more illegals to what's already a crisis? Why not secure the border and let as few people in as possible until we've dealt with the mess we have now?

There is no demanding Mr dramatic. It is a bi partisan bill and it makes improvements to a broken system. Right now there is no cap requirement for a border shutdown. So what that bill has is better than the current situation. And like I said, it can always be improved on

 

[Slade3200]

Why not secure the border and let as few people in as possible until we've dealt with the mess we have now?

You don’t just flip a switch and shut down the border. The situation is much more complicated than that. Yall pretend that Trump had it secured and shut down. Yet thousands stil entered illegally and caravans still migrated to the border. He didn’t solve anything

 

[Slade3200]

Because it isn’t needed.

The President doesn’t need a single bit of authority to shut it down. Now. He already has it.

It’s not about authority to shut it down, it’s about a mandate to do so at a certain point. I’d think y’all would be all about that. And to your second point. I believe this bill does provide funding for the patrol and detention facilities and speeds up the process, while also making it stricter to claim asylum

 

[BackAgain]

It’s not about authority to shut it down, it’s about a mandate to do so at a certain point. I’d think y’all would be all about that. But here you are fighting against it

No mandate required. Silly claim.

Just simply enforce the laws we already have.

 

[Slade3200]

As if Biden r any Democrat President would abide by the figures.

FFS, Biden threw the border wide open on Day One of his Junta.

That has nothing to do with anything

 

[Mac-7]

So under the Senate Bill, we're to allow the equivalent of Patton's Third Army to cross into America on a monthly basis

Well done!

 

[BackAgain]

That has nothing to do with anything

Of course it does.
The laws are already in place.
Fine tuning them is all well and good.
But that doesn’t mean that Brandon “needs” any new fucking law to do what the law already requires.

He should enforce our laws.

 

[Mac-7]

It just lets illegals in the same as before but they called it an immigration bill.

It's a fake bill just to get more money to Ukraine so they can stash it away - steal it.

Its plausible deniability for libs to hide behind while they continue to flood America with illegal aliens

 

[JGalt]

You don’t just flip a switch and shut down the border. The situation is much more complicated than that. Yall pretend that Trump had it secured and shut down. Yet thousands stil entered illegally and caravans still migrated to the border. He didn’t solve anything

Just shut the fuck up with your gaslighting. You're not fooling anyone.

CBP Enforcement Statistics

 

[Foxfyre]

How about we instead just no longer accept any human on Earth who is seeking asylum?

Are you persecuted? We dont give a fuck. Are people going to kill you in your home nation? We still dont give a fuck.

Those without a clue don't have a problem with multi millions of people who we can't verify their real names or where they are from or what their character or track record is or what their intentions are running loose in the country. If even 1% of 4 million people are capable of violence and that is an extremely low estimate, then that's 40,000 people who very well might kill us in our home nation. And that doesn't include all those who will vandalize, break and enter, burglarize, steal, and commit all manner of other crimes. An estimated 25,000+ of these asylum seekers are military aged single men from China. That alone should at least give pause for thought.

Probably the large majority intend to commit no crimes, but they nevertheless are draining mega billions in resources from American people including the poorest Americans.

So are you without a clue? You're good with all that? If so, so be it, but understand that any people still capable of critical thinking know that the situation is insane and unsustainable if America is going to remain a world power.

 

[Godboy]

Those without a clue don't have a problem with multi millions of people who we can't verify their real names or where they are from or what their character or track record is or what their intentions are running loose in the country. If even 1% of 4 million people are capable of violence and that is an extremely low estimate, then that's 40,000 people who very well might kill us in our home nation. And that doesn't include all those who will vandalize, break and enter, burglarize, steal, and commit all manner of other crimes. An estimated 25,000+ of these asylum seekers are military aged single men from China. That alone should at least give pause for thought.

Probably the large majority intend to commit no crimes, but they nevertheless are draining mega billions in resources from American people including the poorest Americans.

So are you without a clue? You're good with all that? If so, so be it, but understand that any people still capable of critical thinking know that the situation is insane and unsustainable if America is going to remain a world power.

I think you mistook my post as being sarcastic. Im serious... i dont care if someone claims they are being persecuted. I dont care if they are legitimately going to be murdered in their home nation. They can all fuck off.

No more immigrants unless they can PROVE that they are a net gain for the US. If they dont have $100,000 in the bank, or they are some kind of robotics genius or something, then its an automatic "no".

 

[Foxfyre]

I think you mistook my post as being sarcastic. Im serious... i dont care if someone claims they are being persecuted. I dont care if they are legitimately going to be murdered in their home nation. They can all fuck off.

No more immigrants unless they can PROVE that they are a net gain for the US. If they dont have $100,000 in the bank, or they are some kind of robotics genius or something, then its an automatic "no".

I did take your post differently from that, and for the most part I agree though I think in certain rare cases there is a justification for granting asylum. In the book/movie "Hunt For Red October" for instance--pure fiction but another brilliant Tom Clancy plot--the Russian captain Ramius is defecting to the USA with a multi-billion dollar experimental nuclear submarine. After the usual complications/conflict that occurs in these stories, the defection is successful and Ramius asks for asylum in the U.S. In a case like that I would want some provision for granting such asylum.

I was once blessed with the opportunity to help a Cuban family assimilate in the U.S. after escaping a brutal and murderous Fidel Castro regime. The mother, father, and at the time two elementary age children have all become wonderful U.S. citizens, patriotic to the core. The only thing they didn't like about the U.S. were the hail and tornadoes as the assimilation took place in west Texas. (P.S. they used the legal immigration policy to apply for a path to citizenship and did not expect that to be granted by fiat/amnesty.)

But certainly refugees/asylum seekers from other countries should be required to seek asylum in the first country they come to. I would prefer to live in New Mexico than Old Mexico too, but their preference is immaterial. They can seek asylum there rather than travel through Mexico to get here where there are more freebies.

 

[Slade3200]

The push back is because the bill makes 2 million the new normal. It also is making catch and release the law.

I would love for someone to point out whats in this bill for US citizens!

Well it takes steps to help regulate and improve a very broken system that is hurting Americans. So by improving it they are helping

 

[Slade3200]

No mandate required. Silly claim.

Just simply enforce the laws we already have.

So you rather leave it to the discretion of whomever is prez… Like it currently is? Why wouldn’t you want it regulated by law so it can’t be ignored?

 

[Slade3200]

Of course it does.
The laws are already in place.
Fine tuning them is all well and good.
But that doesn’t mean that Brandon “needs” any new fucking law to do what the law already requires.

He should enforce our laws.

Save that for the campaign. You can use that to run against him. But this is a discussion about a piece of congressional legislation designed to address issues at the border

 

[BackAgain]

So you rather leave it to the discretion of whomever is prez… Like it currently is? Why wouldn’t you want it regulated by law so it can’t be ignored?

Ok. Pass a law that makes enforcing the law mandatory.

Except I believe he already took the oath of office.

 

[BackAgain]

Save that for the campaign. You can use that to run against him. But this is a discussion about a piece of congressional legislation designed to address issues at the border

It’s a discussion about whether that fucking bullshit proposed legislation is even meaningful.

It’s not.

 

[Slade3200]

Ok. Pass a law that makes enforcing the law mandatory.

Except I believe he already took the oath of office.

The law regulates how the law is enforced. Right now it is up to the discretion of the executive. The new law gives a mandate for a specific action under specific conditions. Why don't you want that? Do you think the current system is better?

 

[Slade3200]

It’s a discussion about whether that fucking bullshit proposed legislation is even meaningful.

It’s not.

The only point you've made is that Biden should do his job. That doesn't have anything to do with a law that forces specific actions under specific conditions. You haven't explained why you think the current system of executive discretion is better than regulated actions.