I live in a country that puts babies in cages

[Hayabusa Rider]

You should try listening to it live instead of getting it spoon fed to you. It would probably sound a little different and add some context.

Instead of having anything spoonfed to you know the law and what it is not. This is Trump's policy and not a mandate under any law, yet he repeats that Dems did it.

There is no moral or legal justification for these actions. That something isn't explicitly disallowed doesn't make for a legal mandate.

 

[hal2kilo]

As usual there is a third way. I understand that "catch and release" into the US is unacceptable to many. I also understand that separating families is the very face of cruelty and there is no legal requirement.

Instead of arguing for a monument to Trump, that is the Wall, detain people in humane facilities and hire the necessary number of people to process those attempting to cross the border. The DHS budget is almost 41 billion and the additional amount necessary would be insignificant compared to the total.

Has ANYONE proposed this?

This is being done on purpose to play on Democrats humanity, and make them agreed to an immigration plan that they will not accept. Of course there are solutions. You don't think this is using the ultimate power of the government to propagandize the whole situation. This is red meat for his base and nothing else. Alternate policies. you funny.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

This is being done on purpose to play on Democrats humanity, and make them agreed to an immigration plan that they will not accept. Of course there are solutions. You don't think this is using the ultimate power of the government to propagandize the whole situation. This is red meat for his base and nothing else. Alternate policies. you funny.

I think that maybe the Dem leadership should continue to wring their hands instead of proposing solutions and working to have them heard. Would that suit you better, to be seen doing nothing of substance?

I'm thinking "no".

 

[sandorski]

I'm watching via reporters posting on twitter. Amongst the rants about Mexicans, kids in cages, and how unfair the media is to him he accused Canadians of smuggling shoes over the border by "scuffing them up".

This person has no tether to reality.

Even if Canadians were, the US benefits. Seems an odd criticism.

 

[glenn1]

As usual there is a third way. I understand that "catch and release" into the US is unacceptable to many. I also understand that separating families is the very face of cruelty and there is no legal requirement.

Instead of arguing for a monument to Trump, that is the Wall, detain people in humane facilities and hire the necessary number of people to process those attempting to cross the border. The DHS budget is almost 41 billion and the additional amount necessary would be insignificant compared to the total.

Has ANYONE proposed this?

That won't interest many Democrats as most have no intention in seeing the law enforced at scale. They'll tolerate some token degree of deportations to maintain plausible deniability but that's it as they view illegal immigrants as their future voter base and are positioning to get them.

 

[hal2kilo]

That won't interest many Democrats as most have no intention in seeing the law enforced at scale. They'll tolerate some token degree of deportations to maintain plausible deniability but that's it as they view illegal immigrants as their future voter base and are positioning to get them.

You and your stupid future voter argument. Never get's old.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That won't interest many Democrats as most have no intention in seeing the law enforced at scale. They'll tolerate some token degree of deportations to maintain plausible deniability but that's it as they view illegal immigrants as their future voter base and are positioning to get them.

If that turns out to be the case then I have something against them as well.

 

[IronWing]

You and your stupid future voter argument. Never get's old.

Yes, yes it actually does.

 

[UNCjigga]

I think that maybe the Dem leadership should continue to wring their hands instead of proposing solutions and working to have them heard. Would that suit you better, to be seen doing nothing of substance?

I'm thinking "no".

What are you talking about? All 49 Dem Senators (even Manchin) have signed onto SB 3036, cosponsored by Republicans. Beto is introducing a House Bill today.

If you are referring to comprehensive immigration reform, Democrats have tried working with Republicans only to face a flip-flop in the end. They can't unilaterally do anything until after the midterms at the earliest.

The Administration is coming at this from stupid...there is no reasoning with these people. The only way a zero-tolerance illegal immigration policy will work (and long-term it's the RIGHT thing to do!) is by INCREASING legal immigration (guest worker programs, temp visas based on skills etc., one-time DACA, perhaps even a path to permanent residency for some illegals.) But Trump wants to cut legal immigration 75% and fully fund a massive infrastructure project up front (almost as dumb as forcing the post office to fully fund retirement up front!)

If we really need a quick fix to curb illegal immigration and asylum seekers, I propose we fund a massive ad campaign in Mexico, Guatemala, and El Salvador and other hot spots. TV, radio, print, billboards and bus stops, etc. Show the images of people falling off trains and getting dismembered. Show migrants who were cooked alive inside a tractor trailer. Show young girls getting sold as sex slaves , show people getting kidnapped for ransom, etc. etc. Then show the people who actually make it across the border getting thrown in detention. Caption: "It isn't worth your life".

Unless and until we can do that, we won't stem the tide.

 

[ivwshane]

Did you manage to get through that cartoon without shitting and pissing all over yourself? I know a picture of a gun is very frightening to you.

And did you get through the comic without getting off? There are alot of guns in the comic.

Or did the comic hit a little too close to home?

Or perhaps the uncomfortable truth about your hypocrisy is what caused your response.

 

[glenn1]

What are you talking about? All 49 Dem Senators (even Manchin) have signed onto SB 3036, cosponsored by Republicans. Beto is introducing a House Bill today.

If you are referring to comprehensive immigration reform, Democrats have tried working with Republicans only to face a flip-flop in the end. They can't unilaterally do anything until after the midterms at the earliest.

The Administration is coming at this from stupid...there is no reasoning with these people. The only way a zero-tolerance illegal immigration policy will work (and long-term it's the RIGHT thing to do!) is by INCREASING legal immigration (guest worker programs, temp visas based on skills etc., one-time DACA, perhaps even a path to permanent residency for some illegals.) But Trump wants to cut legal immigration 75% and fully fund a massive infrastructure project up front (almost as dumb as forcing the post office to fully fund retirement up front!)

If we really need a quick fix to curb illegal immigration and asylum seekers, I propose we fund a massive ad campaign in Mexico, Guatemala, and El Salvador and other hot spots. TV, radio, print, billboards and bus stops, etc. Show the images of people falling off trains and getting dismembered. Show migrants who were cooked alive inside a tractor trailer. Show young girls getting sold as sex slaves , show people getting kidnapped for ransom, etc. etc. Then show the people who actually make it across the border getting thrown in detention. Caption: "It isn't worth your life".

Unless and until we can do that, we won't stem the tide.

I agree that Trump is as much if not more of an obstacle to a long-term fix if anything since as you correctly point out Trump wants to reduce legal immigration which is exactly opposite of what is needed (I'm guessing legal immigration quotas probably need to be doubled or tripled from current levels). Our immigration policy should be to make supply of legal visas/work permits basically meet demand thus making safe and legal immigration the only rational path for anyone to take. Nobody in DC seems to want that however because it endangers the availability of cheap slave labor and as I said earlier, lots of votes.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Heh. The State Dept. held a Q&A on Facebook about family travel hacks... It didn't go well.

Don't do anything public with shit like this going on.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/19/politics/state-qa-immigration-children/index.html?utm_term=image&utm_content=2018-06-19T19:10:02&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twCNN

"Before traveling I plan to help my child memorize phone numbers of family members," said Electra Lorraine Botts. "Will the detention tent camp workers have phones available for my child to call for help, or are phones banned because they might use them to film atrocities."

"Do you provide nut-free cages for children with allergies?" asked Chris Hampton.

"What's the difference between a cage and a chain linked partition?" said Joseph Saitta. "Asking for a child."

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

What are you talking about? All 49 Dem Senators (even Manchin) have signed onto SB 3036, cosponsored by Republicans. Beto is introducing a House Bill today.

If you are referring to comprehensive immigration reform, Democrats have tried working with Republicans only to face a flip-flop in the end. They can't unilaterally do anything until after the midterms at the earliest.

The Administration is coming at this from stupid...there is no reasoning with these people. The only way a zero-tolerance illegal immigration policy will work (and long-term it's the RIGHT thing to do!) is by INCREASING legal immigration (guest worker programs, temp visas based on skills etc., one-time DACA, perhaps even a path to permanent residency for some illegals.) But Trump wants to cut legal immigration 75% and fully fund a massive infrastructure project up front (almost as dumb as forcing the post office to fully fund retirement up front!)

If we really need a quick fix to curb illegal immigration and asylum seekers, I propose we fund a massive ad campaign in Mexico, Guatemala, and El Salvador and other hot spots. TV, radio, print, billboards and bus stops, etc. Show the images of people falling off trains and getting dismembered. Show migrants who were cooked alive inside a tractor trailer. Show young girls getting sold as sex slaves , show people getting kidnapped for ransom, etc. etc. Then show the people who actually make it across the border getting thrown in detention. Caption: "It isn't worth your life".

Unless and until we can do that, we won't stem the tide.

I think it's great that there is a bill out there. Unfortunately it offers nothing to motivate Republicans politically, hence doing something like increasing the ability to offer due process and humane conditions. If a Republican breaks with Trump he or she needs something to show their constituents, in this case a functioning and competent process.

Will Dems allow the building of detention facilities provided they are humane, leave families whole and fund sufficient personel to give due process in short order? I'm not talking years or many months, but say 90 days, hopefully less?

Would they compromise to end cruelty? I'm not saying that Republicans would be responsive, but just how many would be needed to make this happen? I don't think too many.

 

[K1052]

That won't interest many Democrats as most have no intention in seeing the law enforced at scale. They'll tolerate some token degree of deportations to maintain plausible deniability but that's it as they view illegal immigrants as their future voter base and are positioning to get them.

It's some next level shit to couch the intrinsic racism of the GOP as sound polity resulting from a group of people who are extremely unlikely ever to be able to vote.

 

[UNCjigga]

I think it's great that there is a bill out there. Unfortunately it offers nothing to motivate Republicans politically, hence doing something like increasing the ability to offer due process and humane conditions. If a Republican breaks with Trump he or she needs something to show their constituents, in this case a functioning and competent process.

Will Dems allow the building of detention facilities provided they are humane, leave families whole and fund sufficient personel to give due process in short order? I'm not talking years or many months, but say 90 days, hopefully less?

Would they compromise to end cruelty? I'm not saying that Republicans would be responsive, but just how many would be needed to make this happen? I don't think too many.

Compromising to end an Administration-sponsored cruelty would only prove to them that cruelty works.

 

[K1052]

Unfortunately it offers nothing to motivate Republicans politically, hence doing something like increasing the ability to offer due process and humane conditions. If a Republican breaks with Trump he or she needs something to show their constituents, in this case a functioning and competent process.

If somebody sets your house on fire then offers the only hose for $10,000 would you consider that a good faith negotiation?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Compromising to end an Administration-sponsored cruelty would only prove to them that cruelty works.

And what would that gain? Trump's wall? No. It would be offering something better I think than anything offered. If the Dems could do some good here it would be seen, and it would do good.

Perhaps that's why I can't be a partisan. If the immigration situation improves and people are treated better with families reunited I won't hold these children hostage for "our" purposes.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

If somebody sets your house on fire then offers the only hose for $10,000 would you consider that a good faith negotiation?

Sorry, the metaphor isn't one I understand. Immigration is a legitimate function, securing the border while being humane and offering timely due process. I already have a hose.

 

[dainthomas]

I agree that Trump is as much if not more of an obstacle to a long-term fix if anything since as you correctly point out Trump wants to reduce legal immigration which is exactly opposite of what is needed (I'm guessing legal immigration quotas probably need to be doubled or tripled from current levels). Our immigration policy should be to make supply of legal visas/work permits basically meet demand thus making safe and legal immigration the only rational path for anyone to take. Nobody in DC seems to want that however because it endangers the availability of cheap slave labor and as I said earlier, lots of votes.

I almost fell out of my chair in shock after agreeing with something you said.

 

[K1052]

Sorry, the metaphor isn't one I understand. Immigration is a legitimate function, securing the border while being humane and offering timely due process. I already have a hose.

Trump says he doesn't want a narrow fix. There is a reason he doesn't want a narrow fix. He wants wall money and cuts to legal immigration. It's the entire reason he started this chain of events.

 

[nakedfrog]

Listened/watched enough of his campaign speeches. If anything the full context of his delivery makes him sound even more batshit.

Invariably.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Trump says he doesn't want a narrow fix. There is a reason he doesn't want a narrow fix. He wants wall money and cuts to legal immigration. It's the entire reason he started this chain of events.

I know what Trump wants but Trump isn't the entire legislature. If he were then there would be universal approval for dividing families. But politicians are horse traders and they need something they can show for doing what we want. Most people I know want some border security, but walls aren't on everyone's list. By offering a compromise, showing that they are the adults in the room, they could work with the very few Republicans to give them an out with rational policies and humane treatment. If they make the attempt and Republicans reject it? Who looks the worse for being petulant children? They do.

 

[jackstar7]

I know what Trump wants but Trump isn't the entire legislature. If he were then there would be universal approval for dividing families. But politicians are horse traders and they need something they can show for doing what we want. Most people I know want some border security, but walls aren't on everyone's list. By offering a compromise, showing that they are the adults in the room, they could work with the very few Republicans to give them an out with rational policies and humane treatment. If they make the attempt and Republicans reject it? Who looks the worse for being petulant children? They do.

You're suggesting that there are rational actors on all sides. That's not proving to be the case.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I know what Trump wants but Trump isn't the entire legislature. If he were then there would be universal approval for dividing families. But politicians are horse traders and they need something they can show for doing what we want. Most people I know want some border security, but walls aren't on everyone's list. By offering a compromise, showing that they are the adults in the room, they could work with the very few Republicans to give them an out with rational policies and humane treatment. If they make the attempt and Republicans reject it? Who looks the worse for being petulant children? They do.

Trump is effectively the entire GOP legislature. They won't do anything at this point to go against him. They are afraid they will lose their seats if they do.

 

[K1052]

I know what Trump wants but Trump isn't the entire legislature. If he were then there would be universal approval for dividing families. But politicians are horse traders and they need something they can show for doing something we want. Most people I know want some border security, but walls aren't on everyone's list. By offering a compromise, showing that they are the adults in the room, they could work with the very few Republicans to give them an out with rational policies and humane treatment. If they make the attempt and Republicans reject it? Who looks the worse for being petulant children? They do.

If Trump's not gonna sign you need a veto proof majority. Likelihood of that happening with his high approval among R voters in the run up to midterms is infinitesimal.