Author Topic: Trump tells progressive Democrats to go back and fix 'broken and crime infested places' they came fr  (Read 13077 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,963
  • Twitter is for Twits
Quote
The law prohibits illegals themselves from receiving benefits.  The problem is the anchor babies who are U.S. citizens do have a legal right to those benefits, so that's why they're being received.  The Administration doesn't have a choice there.

@Maj. Bill Martin

AND....,unless I have been mislead,the illegal alien parents get to stay here in order to care for their anchor babies,and the anchor baby's checks come to the parents FOR the children,because children obviously can't write checks,balance checkbooks,or be held responsible for managing their money

Quote
The solution is obviously to boot out the people who are here illegally, regardless of whether or not they have an anchor baby.


Boot out the anchor baby with the parents. After all,what right do we have to take a child away from it's parents?

Flat out,we MUST eliminate the anchor baby system or we won't have a system.

 
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!

Offline Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36,450
AND....,unless I have been mislead,the illegal alien parents get to stay here in order to care for their anchor babies

@sneakypete

Not according to US law.  They are still in violation of immigration laws punishable by 6 months in prison (or two years for second offenders).  The children have a legal right to stay, but the parents do not.  So it is either find some foster parents they trust, or take their US citizen children back from where they came.

(Not that any of this ever gets enforced).
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Offline truth_seeker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 28,386
  • Gender: Male
  • Common Sense Results Oriented Conservative Veteran
@sneakypete

Not according to US law.  They are still in violation of immigration laws punishable by 6 months in prison (or two years for second offenders).  The children have a legal right to stay, but the parents do not.  So it is either find some foster parents they trust, or take their US citizen children back from where they came.

(Not that any of this ever gets enforced).
The ill conceived Amnesty 33 years ago under a "conservative icon," resulted in the very logical conclusion to get in here, and most likely get to stay.


And get to stay, they have. Deporting illegals has never been a priority sincee 1986. Deporting technically illegal parents of minor citizens has never been a priority.


Occasional shows have been made of interior, workplace enforcement.


Interior enforcement has not been a priority since 1954, Operation Wetback, under Eisenhower when over 1 million were deported.
"God must love the common man, he made so many of them.�  Abe Lincoln

Offline Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36,450
I don't recall any charges of racism when the libs were telling Melania Trump to go back where she came from.

If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Online Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,858
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
Boot out the anchor baby with the parents. After all,what right do we have to take a child away from it's parents?

I agree that we should boot the parents.  We still run into the problem of not having enough immigration judges and ICE to process all the people who would need to be deported.  As a practical matter, what we need to do is greatly strengthen the lawful-status check system for employment, and greatly increase punishment for employers who hire people who are here illegally.  You may get a lot of self-deports if you can do that.

Quote
Flat out,we MUST eliminate the anchor baby system or we won't have a system.

I agree.  Not sure there's much of a chance of that happening, through.  You'd need a very favorable court decision or a constitutional amendment.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2019, 02:36:05 pm by Maj. Bill Martin »

Offline sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,963
  • Twitter is for Twits
I agree that we should boot the parents.  We still run into the problem of not having enough immigration judges and ICE to process all the people who would need to be deported.  As a practical matter, what we need to do is greatly strengthen the lawful-status check system for employment, and greatly increase punishment for employers who hire people who are here illegally.  You may get a lot of self-deports if you can do that.

I agree.  Not sure there's much of a chance of that happening, through.  You'd need a very favorable court decision or a constitutional amendment.

@Maj. Bill Martin

Since when has the Constitution demanded we give citizenship to anyone that shows up?
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!

Offline Rivergirl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,036
My opinion...…………...IF the President 'won' this one...……...America lost it's soul.

Online Cyber Liberty

  • Coffee! Donuts! Kittens!
  • Administrator
  • ******
  • Posts: 80,178
  • Gender: Male
  • 🌵🌵🌵
My opinion...…………...IF the President 'won' this one...……...America lost it's soul.

I'm afraid that ship has sailed....
For unvaccinated, we are looking at a winter of severe illness and death — if you’re unvaccinated — for themselves, their families, and the hospitals they’ll soon overwhelm. Sloe Joe Biteme 12/16
I will NOT comply.
 
Castillo del Cyber Autonomous Zone ~~~~~>                          :dontfeed:

Online Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,858
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
@Maj. Bill Martin

Since when has the Constitution demanded we give citizenship to anyone that shows up?

Whether or not the birthright citizens doctrine is actually a correct interpretation of the Constitution is a separate issue from how widely accepted that idea is, and the unlikelihood that the Supreme Court would ever say otherwise.

Offline Hoodat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36,450
The anchor baby provision really has no effect as long as we are determined to permanently deport their illegal parents.  If the anchor babies go back with their parents while retaining their citizenship, then they can return when they turn 18 or when their parents surrender guardianship to someone legally living in the US.  And as long as they retain their citizenship no matter where they live, they are responsible for paying taxes to the US government for any income generated.
If a political party does not have its foundation in the determination to advance a cause that is right and that is moral, then it is not a political party; it is merely a conspiracy to seize power.

-Dwight Eisenhower-


"The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals ... it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government ... it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen's protection against the government."

-Ayn Rand-

Offline sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,963
  • Twitter is for Twits
And as long as they retain their citizenship no matter where they live, they are responsible for paying taxes to the US government for any income generated.

@Hoodat

ROFLMAO!

Good one!

How are you going to tax cash from the sale of drugs and stolen goods? IF/WHEN these people come back,it will be to "retire in place" on welfare.
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 46,021
  • Gender: Male
  • "...and the winning number is...not yours!
@Hoodat

ROFLMAO!

Good one!

How are you going to tax cash from the sale of drugs and stolen goods? IF/WHEN these people come back,it will be to "retire in place" on welfare.

Crap..... I'm still wondering why they aren't paying for 'The Wall' with Chapo Guzman's confiscated $13 BILLION?
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - David Burge (Iowahawk)

"It was only a sunny smile, and little it cost in the giving, but like morning light it scattered the night and made the day worth living" F. Scott Fitzgerald

Offline sneakypete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 52,963
  • Twitter is for Twits
Crap..... I'm still wondering why they aren't paying for 'The Wall' with Chapo Guzman's confiscated $13 BILLION?

@DCPatriot

Me,too. To give him the credit he is due,so is Ted Cruz.
Anyone who isn't paranoid in 2021 just isn't thinking clearly!

Online roamer_1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 43,757
Crap..... I'm still wondering why they aren't paying for 'The Wall' with Chapo Guzman's confiscated $13 BILLION?

Are you still under the illusion that you are getting a wall, @DCPatriot ?

Offline LegalAmerican

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,124
  • Gender: Female
The law prohibits illegals themselves from receiving benefits.  The problem is the anchor babies who are U.S. citizens do have a legal right to those benefits, so that's why they're being received.  The Administration doesn't have a choice there.

The solution is obviously to boot out the people who are here illegally, regardless of whether or not they have an anchor baby.  But there is a massive backlog of immigration cases and deportation orders that can't be resolved unless/until Congress appropriates more money, which they won't do.  And Trump's other efforts to enforce immigration law often get stymied by judges.

It's a crappy situation, but Trump isn't the guy deserving of blame for it.   Congress is the problem.




Thank you.  Even links don't help some people.  Splitting hairs.  About 70+% of illegals receive some form of welfare, put in by JFK. .   Then JFK, LBJ, TEDDY, put the nail in our coffin with, CELLER/HART ACT 1965...& Clinton 1996 laws.

 Illegal Immigrants Receive Billions of Dollars More from the IRS than They Pay in

By Peter A. Schulkin on September 16, 2011

Offline LegalAmerican

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,124
  • Gender: Female
Crap..... I'm still wondering why they aren't paying for 'The Wall' with Chapo Guzman's confiscated $13 BILLION?


Money ISN'T the issue.  It is congress DEMON-RATS & Rino's, who won't VOTE for the funds to be used for that.
NATIONAL EMERGENCY AT BORDER...all voted AGAINST THAT & the dirty dozen.  Who gave Illegals all the perks?

IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET
1 – A JOB,
2 – A DRIVERS LICENSE,
3 – SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
4 – WELFARE,
5 – FOOD STAMPS,
6 – CREDIT CARDS,
7 – SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
8 – FREE EDUCATION,
9 – FREE HEALTH CARE,
10 – A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON
11 – BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE
12 – AND THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY’S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON’T GET ENOUGH RESPECT

Offline LegalAmerican

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,124
  • Gender: Female
My opinion...…………...IF the President 'won' this one...……...America lost it's soul.

YOU..support ANTI-AMERICANS?  4 COMMUNISTS?  TWO, WHO SUPPORT THE KORAN & SHARIA LAW?  YOU ARE LOST.

Offline LegalAmerican

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,124
  • Gender: Female

Money ISN'T the issue.  It is congress DEMON-RATS & Rino's, who won't VOTE for the funds to be used for that.
NATIONAL EMERGENCY AT BORDER...all voted AGAINST THAT & the dirty dozen.  Who gave Illegals all the perks?

IF YOU CROSS THE U.S. BORDER ILLEGALLY YOU GET
1 – A JOB,
2 – A DRIVERS LICENSE,
3 – SOCIAL SECURITY CARD,
4 – WELFARE,
5 – FOOD STAMPS,
6 – CREDIT CARDS,
7 – SUBSIDIZED RENT OR A LOAN TO BUY A HOUSE,
8 – FREE EDUCATION,
9 – FREE HEALTH CARE,
10 – A LOBBYIST IN WASHINGTON
11 – BILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS PRINTED IN YOUR LANGUAGE
12 – AND THE RIGHT TO CARRY YOUR COUNTRY’S FLAG WHILE YOU PROTEST THAT YOU DON’T GET ENOUGH RESPECT


The 12 Senate Republicans who voted AGAINST NATIONAL EMERGENCY AT BORDER.  (NOT TO MENTION ALL THE DEMON-RATS)

 Roger Wicker of Mississippi,
Marco Rubio of Florida,
 Rob Portman of Ohio,
 Susan Collins of Maine,
 Lisa Murkowski of Alaska,
Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania,
 Roy Blunt of Missouri,
 Lamar Alexander of Tennessee,
 Mitt Romney of Utah,


 Rand Paul of Kentucky,


Jerry Moran of Kansas
and Mike Lee of Utah.

Offline LegalAmerican

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,124
  • Gender: Female
JFK under "civil rights" increased BOTH ILLEGALS & ISLAMISTS coming into America. He started the idea, pushed & promoted the idea that "rich America should give ILLEGALS. ...WELFARE".   LBJ & TEDDY PUSHED THAT idea and now both ideas, are harming America.  UNDER THE GUISE OF CIVIL RIGHTS.

 DEMON-RATS don't want to change this antiquated law, giving illegals welfare. THAT is what draws them here!
------------------------------
REVISED?

The 1965 act marked a radical break from the immigration policies of the past.

 The law as it stood then excluded Asians and Africans and preferred northern and western Europeans over southern and eastern ones.[2] At the height of the civil rights movement of the 1960s the law was seen as an embarrassment by, among others, President John F. Kennedy, who called the then-quota-system "nearly intolerable".[3]

After Kennedy's assassination, President Lyndon Johnson signed the bill at the foot of the Statue of Liberty as a symbolic foothold of signing the bill.


In order to convince the American people of the legislation's merits, its proponents assured that passage would not influence America's culture significantly. President Johnson called the bill "not a revolutionary bill. It does not affect the lives of millions",[4] while Secretary of State Dean Rusk and other politicians, including Senator Ted Kennedy, hastened to reassure the populace that the demographic mix would not be affected; these assertions would later prove grossly inaccurate.[5]


In line with earlier immigration law, the bill also prohibited the entry into the country of "sexual deviants", including homosexuals. By doing so it crystallized the policy of the INS that had previously been rejecting homosexual immigrants on the grounds that they were "mentally defective" or had a "constitutional psychopathic inferiority". The provision discriminating against gay people was rescinded by the Immigration Act of 1990.[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigrati ... ct_of_1965
(Summary by Wade Johnson)
 http://library.uwb.edu/static/USimmigra ... y_act.html


Offline libertybele

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 57,303
  • Gender: Female
@Maj. Bill Martin

Since when has the Constitution demanded we give citizenship to anyone that shows up?

No the Constitution doesn't but technically if the pregnant illegal woman comes over and gives birth on American soil, then that baby automatically becomes a U.S. citizen born on U.S. soil??
Romans 12:16-21

Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly, do not claim to be wiser than you are.  Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all.  If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all…do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51,564
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
No the Constitution doesn't but technically if the pregnant illegal woman comes over and gives birth on American soil, then that baby automatically becomes a U.S. citizen born on U.S. soil??

Patently untrue!
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Offline Formerly Once-Ler

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 0
My opinion...…………...IF the President 'won' this one...……...America lost it's soul.

YOU..support ANTI-AMERICANS?  4 COMMUNISTS?  TWO, WHO SUPPORT THE KORAN & SHARIA LAW?  YOU ARE LOST.
@LegalAmerican
@Rivergirl

Four Republicans voted to rebuke the President for his racism.  Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania, Fred Upton of Michigan, Will Hurd of Texas and Susan Brooks of Indiana...as did Justin Amash.  LA would have you believe they just decided to side with Anti-Americans over our righteous, innocent, and certainly NOT sowing the divisive seeds of xenophobia President.  More contemptible LA has now besmirched Rivergirl being on the Anti-American side. 

Nov 2020 is a long ways away but the GOP has turned very ugly.  I'm long past supporting them, and I'm now asking myself how ugly I'm willing to lazily do nothing more than talk.  If I find myself voting next year it will be becuse you helped motivate me @LegalAmerican because I want to send a message that what you view as Anti-American is my refusal to concede that the America I love is gone.

Offline Rivergirl

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,036
The attacks, insults, and utter stupidity of those insults does nothing but inspire me to continue to speak up and speak out.  There is nothing on this earth that would allow me to approve of this president or this republican party.
This president used the occasion of the death of Justice Stevens to hurl more insults at the congresswomen, and Mueller.   In what world do his supporters and defenders live that this is acceptable behavior while on his way to pay his 'respects' to the Justice.
Not a minute goes by that he does not behave in a reprehensible manner.


Online Maj. Bill Martin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10,858
  • Gender: Male
  • I'll make Mincemeat out of 'em"
In what world do his supporters and defenders live that this is acceptable behavior while on his way to pay his 'respects' to the Justice.

We live in a world where if the Democrats win in 2020, free political speech may be squelched with Democrat appointments to the FEC, Dem pols likely will pressure "private" companies like Google, Facebook, etc., to censor views with which Democrats don't agree, Supreme Court appointments may lead to an overturning of Citizens United, colleges unconstrained by the Justice Department are more likely to suppress conservative speech, left-wing cities will become further emboldened to permit leftist gangs to assault people engaging in free speech/assembly of which they do not approve, and Dems likely will push through immigration "reforms" that grant citizenship and voting rights to millions of illegals in key swing states -- enough to permanently alter the electoral map.

We live in a world where if Democrats win in 2020, it may well be the last free and fair Presidential election we will ever see. 

So if you're wondering why some people can still support Trump's re-election despite the reality that he sometimes says very offensive things...that's why.  Because the only realistic alternative is much, much worse.

« Last Edit: July 23, 2019, 12:54:14 pm by Maj. Bill Martin »

Offline Right_in_Virginia

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 79,794
:bs:
This president used the occasion of the death of Justice Stevens to hurl more insults at the congresswomen, and Mueller.   

THIS POST is absolute  :bs: @Rivergirl   The President tweeted his opinions an hour before arriving at the Supreme Court .... he did NOT "use the occasion of the death of Justice Stevens" to do anything.

Maybe you should consider broadening your information horizons beyond Politico.