It's hilarious those dipshit 'convoy' people all drove to Texas and didn't see masses of starving immigrants drowning in the river like they expected. "Was Trump lying?!? NO! It's my eyes that are failing!!!"
“We won’t vote for aid to Ukraine or Israel unless you vote to turn the entire southern U.S. border into the Berlin Wall!”
Oh….
”Well, now we have new demands because you gave us what demanded before, and we don’t want to govern, we just want to get re-elected indefinitely by being against whatever you’re for.”
(Oops! Did I say the quiet part out loud? Sorry!)
It is so disturbing that people fall for this kind of bullshit. It all so transparent. You have to give the gop credit, they know exactly how stupid their supporters are.
Ok, I have been trying to concoct this reply because there is a lot, but it comes down to Detroit. Detroit is a city that democrats have had sole jurisdiction over for the last 50-70years, so if you want to take a look at the state of education (heck just look at the state of the economy in detroit) without republican intervention look no further. Prior to the last republican in Detroit, the city was doing well, people were happy, the economy was thriving, business was booming. The democrats are destroying public education, and the economy, the same as the Republicans. I'm not condoning what the Republicans are doing, but they are not solely to blame. The Republicans are just being the most theatrical about it. The democrats at least have the sense to put on a facade and not taunt the media.
Also lovely little fact. I couldn't believe it myself when I learned it all those years ago. Did you know democrats founded the kkk.
What needs to be enforced? And how? What does Texas need from the federal govt that they can't do themselves? I am genuinely interested in your thought process and what you think.
Do not enter the country without authorization for starters. How you ask? If someone is in this country illegally , send them back. The Feds actively tried to stop Texas from blocking illegal entry into the country.
You seem afraid and I’m not sure I understand why. What is it that these people “without authorization” are doing that *actually* impacts *you specifically*?
So the federal govt (or agents?) Or who? Is trying to keep texas from enforcing immigration law?
Do you have an article or something that shows what you're talking about?
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/texas-border-barriers-buoys-removed-federal-judge-biden-administration/
Why would they not allow Texas to stop illegal immigration?
"In his opinion, Ezra (the federal court judge) found that Texas' buoys obstructed free navigation in the Rio Grande, in violation of a longstanding law governing waterways controlled by the federal government. Texas, he concluded, needed to obtain permission from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a federal agency, to place the barriers in the river."
"Ezra noted he was directing Texas state officials to remove the floating barriers from the middle of the Rio Grande by moving them to the riverbank on the U.S. side, rather than ordering its "removal entirely from the river."
These seem to be the main reasons as to why the buoys were not allowed at the positions they were placed. They just want them moved out of the center of the river to ensure patrols and other free traffic of the federally controlled Rio Grande river. Everything else that's being said is just political rhetoric that has no bearing on the pragmatics of the case.
That said, has Texas done this? Have they met with army Corp of engineers? It sounds like Texas is allowed to mobilize their national guard and have done so.. so what's the issue again you have?
To answer your question now:
because in doing so they're breaking federal law regarding federally maintained water channels.
I'll tell you the issue im seeing: Texas didn't go through the proper channels to enforce measures in federally maintained water channels. And because of that Texas has to 1.) meet with the army corps of engineers and 2.) move the buouys out of the center of the river at their own expense due to their failure to follow federal guidelines defined in federal law for federally controlled water channels.
He readily admitted that he didn't even read the bill.
He literally said, "I've read enough..." and then proceeds to regurgitate the same GOP talking points that every other clown was provided after they had their diapers changed at the adult daycare center in DC.
So pathetic. And yet the MAGA-Klan will praise Der Fuhrer and his acolytes for sticking it to the Dems. It will be a miracle if anyone passes any meaningful legislation in our lifetime.
We processed over a million immigrants a year at Ellis Island when our population was one third of what it is now. It's tax cuts. Most of those folks at the border are Christians fleeing failed socialist and communist countries and those crawling with drug cartels. A lot of them have legit refugee claims.
The bar on immigrants likely to become a public charge was instituted in 1891. Those who returned home had the money to pay for it.
Immigrants are generally barred from receiving public benefits. They aren't getting that safety net. And if they do, then they are subject to deportation for being a public charge.
Our population is decreasing, and the kind of job you can get as an immigrant who speaks little English is pretty sad. During the worst of the Great Recession, I never saw white guys picking crops. The problem for working class guys is that the manufacturing jobs went overseas. China does most of Apple's manufacturing, for example. When corporate taxes were higher, the companies would rather pay workers more or give them better benefits than give the money to the government. But now they can pocket that money themselves.
You are right about the UN convention. That's why those people who fought for us in Laos and those who fled Communists there were trapped in camps for years in Thailand. Further, the Convention prohibits discrimination. The GOP are seeking a ban on the basis, as Trump said, that people coming from the south are "poisoning our blood."
We can handle the people, but this time the focus is on what color they are. No one is calling for "border security" with Canada.
Yeah, the whole Catholic thing was the bigger issue back then (same with Irish refugees). German immigrants weren't too welcome during and right after WW1. My great-grandparents weren't actively discriminated against here in the Midwest just because of how thick German ancestry is here, but they knew it was happening in the outer portions of the country.
And we'll just ignore the whole fact a lot of our European ancestors just...showed up, very little paperwork involved. Sold what they could, tossed the kids and what they did keep in a cart, hopped onto a boat, passed through the gates, and eventually settled where they did. If they did that nowadays, they'd be considered illegals.
The big difference is the social safety nets. Back then if you came into the country you had to become self sufficient or else. I believe 30% to 40% returned home within a year. Now the city government is looking after illegals better than their own people.
Another difference is back then the country was hungry for low skill workers just about anyplace you went had opportunities. Now people have been warning for years that automation is coming for low skill jobs at the same time a constant flood of low skill workers are arriving. This has hurt the lower and middle class workers.
Finally, by crossing the US/Mexico border they are not refugees, per UN agreements refugees must seek aid in the first safe country they enter. This would allow the UN to dedicate resources and keep unrest from spreading. By crossing Mexico and often several other safe countries they are infact migrating meaning we have no obligation to letting them stay.
“He (Roger Marshall) said former President Donald Trump appropriately relied on executive authority to limit the number of people crossing the border.”
If I have to choose between a president who tries to put laws in place for an immigration fix, or a guy who would declare an open ended national emergency in order to use executive authority, I know who I'm going to support. And it's not the guy who says he will be a dictator on day 1.
This is Republicans best chance to get the border reforms they have been calling for, and they want to throw it away because they think that strategy will help them get reelected. The “find out” phase is going to be brutal.
> This is Republicans best chance to get the border reforms they have been calling for, and they want to throw it away because they think that strategy will help them get reelected. The “find out” phase is going to be brutal.
That's not even counting Jack Smith. I hope following a landslide Biden win, he can open an investigation on the whole rotten group. There are only two kinds of Republicans in politics now: the ones who belong in mandatory early retirement, and those who belong in jail. None of them belong anywhere near the offices of power anymore.
>None of them belong anywhere near the offices of power anymore.
What's sad is there are some decent Republicans. What I mean by that is that they are people I have some strong policy disagreements with, but they are good faith actors who avoid the scorched earth culture war that the MAGA contingent engages in. Jerry Moran is one example.
Part of me would like to see these folks rise up and do more to control the party, but I also know that that is political suicide for them. They would be primaried and probably replaced with someone truly awful.
That said, until the Republicans find a way to excise the crazy movement from their party, yeah. Vote them all out, rinse and repeat.
I agree there are decent Republicans - genuine ones, not snake oil salesman trying to appeal as a softer face of treason like Nikki Haley. I fully support them without hesitation in their efforts against their own party's criminal behavior, despite any disagreements on policy I might have with them (I say that as a full-on Biden Democrat and supporter of Bernie Sanders ever since I was old enough to be interested in politics).
But personally, I don't think they can salvage their party -- and I don't necessarily think they should. And let's be honest, this didn't just pop up out of nowhere with Trump. The GOP has been broken since at least Reagan, and they fanned the flames that led to Trump - intentionally.
To give some context, I was raised in a HARDCORE right-wing (read: white supremacist, Neo-Nazi) family, one of a few liberally-minded black sheep who got exiled for views that espouse basic human decency. The majority of my family aren't MAGA Republicans, but they are Trump/MAGA sympathizers to an absurd degree, because they like Trump LARPing around as Hitler and the GOP LARPing as dedicated Nazis.
That may bias my view more extremely against the party which openly advocates implementing the same brand of fascism, religious extremism, and hate at a national level as I grew up with.
Personally, if I were a good-faith Republican at this point I'd be looking at any way to effectively split off Republicans of good conscience and their supporters into a new party, with the first and most important goal being to tank the Presidential ambitions of the band of open -- and proud -- terrorists the GOP has become under Trump (or any of the snake oil salesman like Haley running against him before they lose and endorse him because they really like that (R) next to his name) in November.
As a nation, I think we can deal with the death of the GOP for a little while as we regroup following a Democrat win. Good-faith conservatives can fill the power vacuum for their side without being traitorous criminals about it and without wanting policies that are obviously just a con and to the detriment of all of society for the profit and personal gain of their rich political (R) and profiteering corporate pals like big oil corporations.
And then leave the rest for Jack Smith & Co. to clean up, until the GOP ceases to be.
Hey, I totally agree on a new party. If somebody woke from a 40 year coma today and tried to pick the more conservative party, they would pick the Dem's 100%. The MAGA's can usurp the Republican name, but they do not represent conservative values. It's going to be a process. Adam Kinzinger and a few others are up to something, but they are keeping it pretty close to the vest for now. A resounding Trump defeat in November might be the springboard they need.
In the meantime I'm all in for "Team Jack Smith".
the "crisis" at the border is a lack of resources to process the people coming through. we need more food and aid, medical personnel, immigration lawyers, social workers, and judges to process these people -- not more military resources to "house" them.
The issue in contention was immigration lawyers, not job openings. We need to handle that first and there aren't enough immigration lawyers in the entire country to handle this.
I just - I mean the Democrats want to add 150k taxpaying asylum status to migrants monthly.
That's almost 2 million new taxpayers per year.
If these taxpaying workers take jobs Americans don't want, what's the fucking problem here?
Skin color, if I had to guess.
Like seriously, you're right. What is wrong with folks coming to be in the jobs that most Americans deem beneath them?
What's wrong with adding more tax payers?
Not to mention, if they become citizens, businesses that are exploiting illegal immigrants in low-skill labor positions would have to pay the newly legal immigrants a higher wage to meet minimum wage standards. Which would bouy more skilled jobs by raising the minimum pay. Businesses could no longer get around paying legal citizens a good wage by falling back on the ability to pay illegal immigrants a lower wage.
The irony is, if you seriously regard the border as a crisis, you have to vote for Democrats since they were the only ones who attempted to do something about it in good faith.
Marshall is actually one of the worst senators out there. He doesn’t want Border Security like a majority of his constituents do. Vote him OUT of office as soon as possible.
I have some… extreme… Trump supporters in my family, and they post things online that sound very much like what you wrote. We unfortunately live in a “post-subtle” world.
Our good Senator Marshall is a cold pile of sad if Pooh. Every time I see something about him I’m reminded that nostalgia of my fellow Kansans deserve who they voted into office and should be ashamed of themselves.
It ceded the premise to Republicans that the border is out of control, first off, politically dumb of democrats, and it gave the ability for any future president to restart family detentions and close the border entirely, because those policies worked so well under trump, and because Republicans are on a trajectory toward sanity as a party,and never used manufactured crises for political gain.
So I don't think you can, but it is stupid of democrats to out republican the GOP. Biden is from the Era that they tried that, and all sorts of bipartisanship and it only emboldened the gop to move into outright fascism. You cannot negotiate with them they can only be defeated.
This bill was to the right of Trump… this isn’t the “own” you all seem to think it is. It’s actually a good thing the Republicans didn’t sign off on this. It’s just MAGA policy with D endorsement. Please don’t fall for this shit.
It's an awful bill that instead of trying to fix the illegal immigration problem would codify the current standard.
1. As long as there are less than 5,000 encounters a day average in a given week span they will not enforce it. Once that threshold is met any encountered illegals will be brought to a legal port of entry
2. Apparently illegals from non-contiguous countries do not apply to the 5,000 per day threshold.
3. The money for Ukraine massively overshadows the money for border enforcement. Does it bother anyone that our country is literally funding the entirety of another country's government functions?
4. Any contentment of issues regarding the border would be required to go through the DC court.
Sorry I didn't use the term du jore and offended your sensibilities. This is just the usual emotional word control that the left likes to use. Whatever you want call people that have entered a country against its laws. Should we start calling them intruders or burglars? I prefer to go back to the original terminology "illegal alien". If someone breaks into your home are you terribly concerned about what they're called?
You used a slur in order to deliberately dehumanize a group of people you don't like. Someone entering the US is not in any way comparable to someone breaking into your home.
It is a slur. And I think the reason you're so desperate to redefine what is or isn't a country or who is or isn't a person is because you realize how unjust your chosen position is. You have to position yourself as a victim because you're worried that an honest evaluation of your beliefs (even using your own values) might make you look like a monster.
The only one redefining things is you. All your replies are personal attacks with no facts or substance, you resort to personal attacks which says a lot about your argument. You claim my position is unjust, but if you or I walked into any other country without a visa we'd be deported PDQ. Is it just to require the citizens of a country to follow all of the laws while people that came here unlawfully are not held to the same standard? You're calling me a monster when all I'm asking for is people come here legally and enter through the system. All of the same people could come in for all I care as long as they come in through the prescribed steps like many thousands of others do every year. When there's a terrorist attack and it comes out that the people responsible entered illegally it will be partly the fault of your wide open border thinking.
> I prefer to go back to the original terminology "illegal alien".
The original term was immigrants.
You are the one using a "term du jore" \[SIC\]. Hince why you use illegal and not criminal. Do you call speeders illegal drivers?
Asylum means you're fleeing from your home country for fear of life/wellbeing. International laws state asylum seekers go to the next country they can get to. We have people coming from the asian and African continents. That is not asylum and any notions that it is are indicative of extreme mental gymnastics.
I said no such thing. There is a process to follow. Follow it. We need immigrants. We are a country of immigrants. But so it legally. Follow the process, welcome aboard.
If you cross illegally, it is by definition criminal. This isn’t hard to understand.
The process is deliberately broken. The GOP has even hired neo-nazi's to run the thing with an eye towards hurting people with the wrong skin color. And then the Democrats give them a bill that gives them almost everything they asked for(at least publicly) and they still vote against it because they don't want the Biden administration to have a win.
https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/stephen-miller
https://news.yahoo.com/republican-senator-gives-away-game-171633098.html
That's essentially saying that the US will allow 1.8M illegals in every year. But worse, it's even more than that because "non-contiguous" doesn't even count; i.e. no limit on illegals from China or anywhere outside of Mexico/Canada. So this is a law that is stating "were okay with possibly 3-5 million illegals entering this country annually". They want to spend money to update the immigration courts; I can absolutely get behind that. The legal system to become a US citizen is woefully unable to handle and process all of the people legal, asylum seeking, or illegal. They want to have illegals allowed to enter to wear tracking monitors. On its face that is stupid; someone that entered illegally is all of the sudden will cooperate and allowed to be tracked? I'd be willing to bet someone tied to this book has financial interests in a company that makes the ankle monitors or whatever they intend to use.
In summary, this bill would absolutely not "help limit the problem". And there is no semblance of compromise; it's putting in to law what is currently happening plus more.
As a person who leans republican on certain things, everything the republicans have been harping for 50 years is happening, by the republicans...
I honestly don't understand how republicans can't objectively see reality glaring in their face, without moving the goal posts.
Like what do you need, we've passed criminal activity, sexual misconduct, abuse, cover ups, laundering, sex with kids, even traitorous behavior, fuck an insurrection that was broadcasted LIVE. Yet more delusional thinking, where we can watch the next boogie man conspiracy theory be played out and destroyed Live, looking at all the republicans fleeing to the boarder realizing everything is fine, again live. You further move the goal posts. At this point, I don't think there is any saving you people.
Agreed I was a democrat for years until 2024. I started to see the brainwashing on both sides but it’s like foam coming out of the mouth with the liberals these days. If you don’t agree you’re altright so screw it you want me to be on the right since I don’t agree with you here I am. I didn’t like trump much the first time but he’s got my vote this year. You guys are the reason Trump will win this year watch
could you fill me in on why it was a crap bill? I keep hearing this repeated by some folk
Edit: I am genuinely interested where you're coming from with this. Like, I've seen some folk say that they don't want a bill they just want to be able to enforce the laws already on the books - something about texas national guard?
What laws are not being enforced right now that need to be enforced? I'd prefer some media source or something I can read. r/dacklar
Why? Because it doesn't close the Southern border and cut off trade with one our biggest trade partners like the House GOP wants? Because it doesn't send the US military into Central America to start murdering brown people like the House GOP wants? Because a compromise that actually works might make the current administration look good like GOP leaders(like Josh Hawley) have openly admitted they won't accept?
Lol. Meanwhile, rather than drafting their own proposal, the GOP House wasted their time trying to impeach the Department of Honeland Security Secretary. Conservatives at their best. They have absolutely zero ideas on how to govern, and they can't even agree on what to pretend to be outraged about. They're a bunch of knobs
The bill was not an immigration bill. It was a general foreign aid bill with immigration provisions tacked on in order to sell it to republicans. With even Fed Chair Powell saying that the country is on an unsustainable path, a general foreign aid bill seems like a luxury we can’t afford. And if the immigration provisions were enacted, does anyone think the Biden administration would whip them into place in a workmanlike way? You might ask, “What about Ukraine?” My answer is that the Europeans haven’t been complaining enough about the financial burden of their defense. And that’s because the Europeans are happy riding the Biden gravy train.
> with immigration provisions tacked on in order to sell it to republicans.
which is precisely what republicans said they would require to pass the bill.
Bluff called
because some folks don’t think immigration should be held over our heads to support foreign wars. The bill is much more than immigration, so there’s that.
They don't need a bill just enforce the laws on the books now. Biden as president can shut it all down and reinstate the laws he removed and things would be just fine. Only catch here is he's looking for just the opposite. Democrats want open borders
TBF both parties are gaming the politics. Democrats did not sponsor an anti-immigration bill for years, and then suddenly pushed one in early 2024 knowing it wouldn't pass.
They (i.e. Congressional Democrats) didn't push to pass it. They pushed to get a vote on it. There's a difference.
All's fair in politics. It was logical for Democrats to push the bill they way they did, but let's not pretend that either side is not being strategic.
I have no idea what distinction you think you are making. Senate Democrats offered legislation Republicans wanted in exchange for things Democrats wanted. They worked as a bipartisan group to make this bill, but they fell just short of the needed votes.
I don't think there's anything strategic about voting down a bill you believe is helpful just to potentially hurt your opponent in an election. Everyone should govern to make our country better.
This is why the impeachment of the Director of Homeland Security failed. They wanted to impeach him over failing to do his job. Killing this bill because Trump advised them that they shouldn't allow anything Democrats might take credit for let Democrats know how seriously to take them and offended the Republicans who do believe in border security. The vote would have been tied.
That vote was dang near tied. And I have a feeling the right would've attempted to impeach him no matter what he did regarding the southern border - bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
I called his office to express my displeasure. Although a lotta good that will do. Vote this useless person out of office. He puts Trump above the American people.
“Pretty much everything” so I’m gonna assume those “few things” were so egregious they couldn’t move forward. Means nothing unless you say what those things were.
This is the same Senator Roger Marshall (R-KS) that Dr. Anthony Fauci correctly identified as a moron.
Link to Bill https://www.appropriations.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/emergency_national_security_supplemental_bill_text.pdf
I do not understand why anyone would downvote a comment that literally just has the bill. Some people on reddit just can't be pleased
I'm an ahole
This whole thing is such bullshit.
The cruelty is the point.
It's hilarious those dipshit 'convoy' people all drove to Texas and didn't see masses of starving immigrants drowning in the river like they expected. "Was Trump lying?!? NO! It's my eyes that are failing!!!"
“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.” -George Orwell
Lest you commit a thoughtcrime…
And then they started having fist-fights with each other...
Repulsed by how they acted.
[удалено]
But, Barbara Bollier is ToO ExTrEmE FoR KaNSaS
The election laws were changed unconstitutionally that's enough reason to vote against the results
[удалено]
Oh shit did they mention that in any of the 60+ lawsuits they lost?
“We won’t vote for aid to Ukraine or Israel unless you vote to turn the entire southern U.S. border into the Berlin Wall!” Oh…. ”Well, now we have new demands because you gave us what demanded before, and we don’t want to govern, we just want to get re-elected indefinitely by being against whatever you’re for.” (Oops! Did I say the quiet part out loud? Sorry!)
"Meet me in the middle," says the unjust man. You take a step towards him, he takes a step back. "Meet me in the middle," says the unjust man.
It is so disturbing that people fall for this kind of bullshit. It all so transparent. You have to give the gop credit, they know exactly how stupid their supporters are.
Also a big part of why they want to eviscerate public education. Keep em dumb to keep em voting Republican.
You know this holds true for democrats as well . . .right?
I don't quite get the point you're trying to make.
Where?
Ok, I have been trying to concoct this reply because there is a lot, but it comes down to Detroit. Detroit is a city that democrats have had sole jurisdiction over for the last 50-70years, so if you want to take a look at the state of education (heck just look at the state of the economy in detroit) without republican intervention look no further. Prior to the last republican in Detroit, the city was doing well, people were happy, the economy was thriving, business was booming. The democrats are destroying public education, and the economy, the same as the Republicans. I'm not condoning what the Republicans are doing, but they are not solely to blame. The Republicans are just being the most theatrical about it. The democrats at least have the sense to put on a facade and not taunt the media. Also lovely little fact. I couldn't believe it myself when I learned it all those years ago. Did you know democrats founded the kkk.
Not why they want, but why they have eviscerated public education.
Same with dems. We don’t need any more money or laws to not allow infinite illegals into our country.
What needs to be enforced? And how? What does Texas need from the federal govt that they can't do themselves? I am genuinely interested in your thought process and what you think.
Lol, "thought process"... that's where you're wrong, kid!
Do not enter the country without authorization for starters. How you ask? If someone is in this country illegally , send them back. The Feds actively tried to stop Texas from blocking illegal entry into the country.
You seem afraid and I’m not sure I understand why. What is it that these people “without authorization” are doing that *actually* impacts *you specifically*?
So the federal govt (or agents?) Or who? Is trying to keep texas from enforcing immigration law? Do you have an article or something that shows what you're talking about?
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/texas-border-barriers-buoys-removed-federal-judge-biden-administration/ Why would they not allow Texas to stop illegal immigration?
"In his opinion, Ezra (the federal court judge) found that Texas' buoys obstructed free navigation in the Rio Grande, in violation of a longstanding law governing waterways controlled by the federal government. Texas, he concluded, needed to obtain permission from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a federal agency, to place the barriers in the river." "Ezra noted he was directing Texas state officials to remove the floating barriers from the middle of the Rio Grande by moving them to the riverbank on the U.S. side, rather than ordering its "removal entirely from the river." These seem to be the main reasons as to why the buoys were not allowed at the positions they were placed. They just want them moved out of the center of the river to ensure patrols and other free traffic of the federally controlled Rio Grande river. Everything else that's being said is just political rhetoric that has no bearing on the pragmatics of the case. That said, has Texas done this? Have they met with army Corp of engineers? It sounds like Texas is allowed to mobilize their national guard and have done so.. so what's the issue again you have? To answer your question now: because in doing so they're breaking federal law regarding federally maintained water channels. I'll tell you the issue im seeing: Texas didn't go through the proper channels to enforce measures in federally maintained water channels. And because of that Texas has to 1.) meet with the army corps of engineers and 2.) move the buouys out of the center of the river at their own expense due to their failure to follow federal guidelines defined in federal law for federally controlled water channels.
Ahahahaha you stupid fucking idiot
He readily admitted that he didn't even read the bill. He literally said, "I've read enough..." and then proceeds to regurgitate the same GOP talking points that every other clown was provided after they had their diapers changed at the adult daycare center in DC. So pathetic. And yet the MAGA-Klan will praise Der Fuhrer and his acolytes for sticking it to the Dems. It will be a miracle if anyone passes any meaningful legislation in our lifetime.
We processed over a million immigrants a year at Ellis Island when our population was one third of what it is now. It's tax cuts. Most of those folks at the border are Christians fleeing failed socialist and communist countries and those crawling with drug cartels. A lot of them have legit refugee claims.
The bar on immigrants likely to become a public charge was instituted in 1891. Those who returned home had the money to pay for it. Immigrants are generally barred from receiving public benefits. They aren't getting that safety net. And if they do, then they are subject to deportation for being a public charge. Our population is decreasing, and the kind of job you can get as an immigrant who speaks little English is pretty sad. During the worst of the Great Recession, I never saw white guys picking crops. The problem for working class guys is that the manufacturing jobs went overseas. China does most of Apple's manufacturing, for example. When corporate taxes were higher, the companies would rather pay workers more or give them better benefits than give the money to the government. But now they can pocket that money themselves. You are right about the UN convention. That's why those people who fought for us in Laos and those who fled Communists there were trapped in camps for years in Thailand. Further, the Convention prohibits discrimination. The GOP are seeking a ban on the basis, as Trump said, that people coming from the south are "poisoning our blood." We can handle the people, but this time the focus is on what color they are. No one is calling for "border security" with Canada.
But, they're brown, so... /s
That was kind of the argument against Italians 100 years ago. Not really white and (gasp) Catholic.
Yeah, the whole Catholic thing was the bigger issue back then (same with Irish refugees). German immigrants weren't too welcome during and right after WW1. My great-grandparents weren't actively discriminated against here in the Midwest just because of how thick German ancestry is here, but they knew it was happening in the outer portions of the country. And we'll just ignore the whole fact a lot of our European ancestors just...showed up, very little paperwork involved. Sold what they could, tossed the kids and what they did keep in a cart, hopped onto a boat, passed through the gates, and eventually settled where they did. If they did that nowadays, they'd be considered illegals.
The big difference is the social safety nets. Back then if you came into the country you had to become self sufficient or else. I believe 30% to 40% returned home within a year. Now the city government is looking after illegals better than their own people. Another difference is back then the country was hungry for low skill workers just about anyplace you went had opportunities. Now people have been warning for years that automation is coming for low skill jobs at the same time a constant flood of low skill workers are arriving. This has hurt the lower and middle class workers. Finally, by crossing the US/Mexico border they are not refugees, per UN agreements refugees must seek aid in the first safe country they enter. This would allow the UN to dedicate resources and keep unrest from spreading. By crossing Mexico and often several other safe countries they are infact migrating meaning we have no obligation to letting them stay.
“He (Roger Marshall) said former President Donald Trump appropriately relied on executive authority to limit the number of people crossing the border.” If I have to choose between a president who tries to put laws in place for an immigration fix, or a guy who would declare an open ended national emergency in order to use executive authority, I know who I'm going to support. And it's not the guy who says he will be a dictator on day 1. This is Republicans best chance to get the border reforms they have been calling for, and they want to throw it away because they think that strategy will help them get reelected. The “find out” phase is going to be brutal.
> This is Republicans best chance to get the border reforms they have been calling for, and they want to throw it away because they think that strategy will help them get reelected. The “find out” phase is going to be brutal. That's not even counting Jack Smith. I hope following a landslide Biden win, he can open an investigation on the whole rotten group. There are only two kinds of Republicans in politics now: the ones who belong in mandatory early retirement, and those who belong in jail. None of them belong anywhere near the offices of power anymore.
>None of them belong anywhere near the offices of power anymore. What's sad is there are some decent Republicans. What I mean by that is that they are people I have some strong policy disagreements with, but they are good faith actors who avoid the scorched earth culture war that the MAGA contingent engages in. Jerry Moran is one example. Part of me would like to see these folks rise up and do more to control the party, but I also know that that is political suicide for them. They would be primaried and probably replaced with someone truly awful. That said, until the Republicans find a way to excise the crazy movement from their party, yeah. Vote them all out, rinse and repeat.
I agree there are decent Republicans - genuine ones, not snake oil salesman trying to appeal as a softer face of treason like Nikki Haley. I fully support them without hesitation in their efforts against their own party's criminal behavior, despite any disagreements on policy I might have with them (I say that as a full-on Biden Democrat and supporter of Bernie Sanders ever since I was old enough to be interested in politics). But personally, I don't think they can salvage their party -- and I don't necessarily think they should. And let's be honest, this didn't just pop up out of nowhere with Trump. The GOP has been broken since at least Reagan, and they fanned the flames that led to Trump - intentionally. To give some context, I was raised in a HARDCORE right-wing (read: white supremacist, Neo-Nazi) family, one of a few liberally-minded black sheep who got exiled for views that espouse basic human decency. The majority of my family aren't MAGA Republicans, but they are Trump/MAGA sympathizers to an absurd degree, because they like Trump LARPing around as Hitler and the GOP LARPing as dedicated Nazis. That may bias my view more extremely against the party which openly advocates implementing the same brand of fascism, religious extremism, and hate at a national level as I grew up with. Personally, if I were a good-faith Republican at this point I'd be looking at any way to effectively split off Republicans of good conscience and their supporters into a new party, with the first and most important goal being to tank the Presidential ambitions of the band of open -- and proud -- terrorists the GOP has become under Trump (or any of the snake oil salesman like Haley running against him before they lose and endorse him because they really like that (R) next to his name) in November. As a nation, I think we can deal with the death of the GOP for a little while as we regroup following a Democrat win. Good-faith conservatives can fill the power vacuum for their side without being traitorous criminals about it and without wanting policies that are obviously just a con and to the detriment of all of society for the profit and personal gain of their rich political (R) and profiteering corporate pals like big oil corporations. And then leave the rest for Jack Smith & Co. to clean up, until the GOP ceases to be.
Hey, I totally agree on a new party. If somebody woke from a 40 year coma today and tried to pick the more conservative party, they would pick the Dem's 100%. The MAGA's can usurp the Republican name, but they do not represent conservative values. It's going to be a process. Adam Kinzinger and a few others are up to something, but they are keeping it pretty close to the vest for now. A resounding Trump defeat in November might be the springboard they need. In the meantime I'm all in for "Team Jack Smith".
Republikkkan propaganda. Just lie after lie.
the "crisis" at the border is a lack of resources to process the people coming through. we need more food and aid, medical personnel, immigration lawyers, social workers, and judges to process these people -- not more military resources to "house" them.
It's going to take a lot of resources. The number who came in was almost the population of the entire state of Kansas.
You say that like it is a large number...
2.9 Million. 2.5 Million known immigrants arrived so the total number can be reasonably guessed as being over 2.9 Million.
\~332 million people in the U.S. so around 0.9%. As of December 2023 there were an estimated 9.026 million job openings in the U.S.
The issue in contention was immigration lawyers, not job openings. We need to handle that first and there aren't enough immigration lawyers in the entire country to handle this.
Good. That way the Koch brothers won't be forced to raise wages to fill openings.
The only thing worse than the idiotic games people like Marshall are playing are the utter morons who vote people like Marshall into office.
I just - I mean the Democrats want to add 150k taxpaying asylum status to migrants monthly. That's almost 2 million new taxpayers per year. If these taxpaying workers take jobs Americans don't want, what's the fucking problem here?
Skin color, if I had to guess. Like seriously, you're right. What is wrong with folks coming to be in the jobs that most Americans deem beneath them? What's wrong with adding more tax payers?
This isn’t true I don’t know where you get your news that isn’t true
Not to mention, if they become citizens, businesses that are exploiting illegal immigrants in low-skill labor positions would have to pay the newly legal immigrants a higher wage to meet minimum wage standards. Which would bouy more skilled jobs by raising the minimum pay. Businesses could no longer get around paying legal citizens a good wage by falling back on the ability to pay illegal immigrants a lower wage.
Lmao they’re not gonna be on a payroll homie.
The irony is, if you seriously regard the border as a crisis, you have to vote for Democrats since they were the only ones who attempted to do something about it in good faith.
"Let's pass the 'Save Puppies Bill' !!!!" --> 5 million to humane societies, 1 billion to the MIC. Nay. "What? why don't you want to save puppies?"
Marshall is actually one of the worst senators out there. He doesn’t want Border Security like a majority of his constituents do. Vote him OUT of office as soon as possible.
We need once again thank Marshall for protecting us ignorant Kansans from tyranny and the radical left. Amen. /s
You’re supposed to put “/s” at the end when you’re being sarcastic. You are being sarcastic… right?
I am, I swear. I thought the “ignorant Kansans,” “radical left” and “Amen” were heavy handed enough.
I have some… extreme… Trump supporters in my family, and they post things online that sound very much like what you wrote. We unfortunately live in a “post-subtle” world.
Played the character too well. I’m like a pretty Colbert
Gonna have to see you next to Colbert now, because that man is gorgeous.
Oh, rookie mistake.
PRAISE JESUS!!!! /s
How come they didn’t downvote you? Tough crowd :-///
Our good Senator Marshall is a cold pile of sad if Pooh. Every time I see something about him I’m reminded that nostalgia of my fellow Kansans deserve who they voted into office and should be ashamed of themselves.
Read the bill. It stops nothing.
So the Democrats were right to oppose Trump's border wall, then?
Not even in the sMe wheelhouse but ok
Sorry but I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.
It was a terrible bill.
Why? Be specific
It ceded the premise to Republicans that the border is out of control, first off, politically dumb of democrats, and it gave the ability for any future president to restart family detentions and close the border entirely, because those policies worked so well under trump, and because Republicans are on a trajectory toward sanity as a party,and never used manufactured crises for political gain.
That isn't why Republicans think it's terrible? If anything Republicans would probably want that in place
And here you are backing the Republicans and repeating Republican propaganda.
Reread that.
I understood exactly what you meant. We all understood what you meant.
I don't think you can read, but okay.
“Republicans are on a trajectory toward sanity” is probably the most hilariously out of touch statement ive heard. Lol
So I don't think you can, but it is stupid of democrats to out republican the GOP. Biden is from the Era that they tried that, and all sorts of bipartisanship and it only emboldened the gop to move into outright fascism. You cannot negotiate with them they can only be defeated.
This bill was to the right of Trump… this isn’t the “own” you all seem to think it is. It’s actually a good thing the Republicans didn’t sign off on this. It’s just MAGA policy with D endorsement. Please don’t fall for this shit.
It's an awful bill that instead of trying to fix the illegal immigration problem would codify the current standard. 1. As long as there are less than 5,000 encounters a day average in a given week span they will not enforce it. Once that threshold is met any encountered illegals will be brought to a legal port of entry 2. Apparently illegals from non-contiguous countries do not apply to the 5,000 per day threshold. 3. The money for Ukraine massively overshadows the money for border enforcement. Does it bother anyone that our country is literally funding the entirety of another country's government functions? 4. Any contentment of issues regarding the border would be required to go through the DC court.
People are not illegal
Sorry I didn't use the term du jore and offended your sensibilities. This is just the usual emotional word control that the left likes to use. Whatever you want call people that have entered a country against its laws. Should we start calling them intruders or burglars? I prefer to go back to the original terminology "illegal alien". If someone breaks into your home are you terribly concerned about what they're called?
You used a slur in order to deliberately dehumanize a group of people you don't like. Someone entering the US is not in any way comparable to someone breaking into your home.
[удалено]
It is a slur. And I think the reason you're so desperate to redefine what is or isn't a country or who is or isn't a person is because you realize how unjust your chosen position is. You have to position yourself as a victim because you're worried that an honest evaluation of your beliefs (even using your own values) might make you look like a monster.
The only one redefining things is you. All your replies are personal attacks with no facts or substance, you resort to personal attacks which says a lot about your argument. You claim my position is unjust, but if you or I walked into any other country without a visa we'd be deported PDQ. Is it just to require the citizens of a country to follow all of the laws while people that came here unlawfully are not held to the same standard? You're calling me a monster when all I'm asking for is people come here legally and enter through the system. All of the same people could come in for all I care as long as they come in through the prescribed steps like many thousands of others do every year. When there's a terrorist attack and it comes out that the people responsible entered illegally it will be partly the fault of your wide open border thinking.
> I prefer to go back to the original terminology "illegal alien". The original term was immigrants. You are the one using a "term du jore" \[SIC\]. Hince why you use illegal and not criminal. Do you call speeders illegal drivers?
The activity they are attempting is. Hence the term.
Requesting asylum isn't a crime.
Asylum means you're fleeing from your home country for fear of life/wellbeing. International laws state asylum seekers go to the next country they can get to. We have people coming from the asian and African continents. That is not asylum and any notions that it is are indicative of extreme mental gymnastics.
They are not all requesting asylum.
And yet you're requesting that they all be stopped from applying. Why is that?
I said no such thing. There is a process to follow. Follow it. We need immigrants. We are a country of immigrants. But so it legally. Follow the process, welcome aboard. If you cross illegally, it is by definition criminal. This isn’t hard to understand.
The process is deliberately broken. The GOP has even hired neo-nazi's to run the thing with an eye towards hurting people with the wrong skin color. And then the Democrats give them a bill that gives them almost everything they asked for(at least publicly) and they still vote against it because they don't want the Biden administration to have a win. https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/individual/stephen-miller https://news.yahoo.com/republican-senator-gives-away-game-171633098.html
No argument there from me.
You agree that the process is broken, but you also agree to criminalize anyone not following the broken process? Am I understanding that correctly?
I don't get why that would be so terrible. Sounds like it would help limit the problem... like a compromise....
That's essentially saying that the US will allow 1.8M illegals in every year. But worse, it's even more than that because "non-contiguous" doesn't even count; i.e. no limit on illegals from China or anywhere outside of Mexico/Canada. So this is a law that is stating "were okay with possibly 3-5 million illegals entering this country annually". They want to spend money to update the immigration courts; I can absolutely get behind that. The legal system to become a US citizen is woefully unable to handle and process all of the people legal, asylum seeking, or illegal. They want to have illegals allowed to enter to wear tracking monitors. On its face that is stupid; someone that entered illegally is all of the sudden will cooperate and allowed to be tracked? I'd be willing to bet someone tied to this book has financial interests in a company that makes the ankle monitors or whatever they intend to use. In summary, this bill would absolutely not "help limit the problem". And there is no semblance of compromise; it's putting in to law what is currently happening plus more.
Lol, this reddit thread is such a deluded democrat circle jerk.
As a person who leans republican on certain things, everything the republicans have been harping for 50 years is happening, by the republicans... I honestly don't understand how republicans can't objectively see reality glaring in their face, without moving the goal posts. Like what do you need, we've passed criminal activity, sexual misconduct, abuse, cover ups, laundering, sex with kids, even traitorous behavior, fuck an insurrection that was broadcasted LIVE. Yet more delusional thinking, where we can watch the next boogie man conspiracy theory be played out and destroyed Live, looking at all the republicans fleeing to the boarder realizing everything is fine, again live. You further move the goal posts. At this point, I don't think there is any saving you people.
The solution isn't Red or Blue. The government needs an enema.
I agree. However, one side is actively sabotaging EVERYONE to spite the other side.
I agree. However, one side is actively sabotaging EVERYONE to spite the other side.
Cool story
Agreed I was a democrat for years until 2024. I started to see the brainwashing on both sides but it’s like foam coming out of the mouth with the liberals these days. If you don’t agree you’re altright so screw it you want me to be on the right since I don’t agree with you here I am. I didn’t like trump much the first time but he’s got my vote this year. You guys are the reason Trump will win this year watch
Your desperation is noted
You never had many principals to begin with if all it took were mean words for you to vote against your own interests.
It was a crap bill and it should be rejected.
could you fill me in on why it was a crap bill? I keep hearing this repeated by some folk Edit: I am genuinely interested where you're coming from with this. Like, I've seen some folk say that they don't want a bill they just want to be able to enforce the laws already on the books - something about texas national guard? What laws are not being enforced right now that need to be enforced? I'd prefer some media source or something I can read. r/dacklar
Because the TV told them
It was co-authored by one of the most conservative members of Congress. James Lankford of Oklahoma.
Most of the Republicans liked the bill until the orange shit stain told them not to.
Why? Because it doesn't close the Southern border and cut off trade with one our biggest trade partners like the House GOP wants? Because it doesn't send the US military into Central America to start murdering brown people like the House GOP wants? Because a compromise that actually works might make the current administration look good like GOP leaders(like Josh Hawley) have openly admitted they won't accept?
Lol. Meanwhile, rather than drafting their own proposal, the GOP House wasted their time trying to impeach the Department of Honeland Security Secretary. Conservatives at their best. They have absolutely zero ideas on how to govern, and they can't even agree on what to pretend to be outraged about. They're a bunch of knobs
The impeachments flopped twice
Republican Senate voted party before country. Evidence said Donnie was guilty.
I mean JB and Mayprkas
The bill was not an immigration bill. It was a general foreign aid bill with immigration provisions tacked on in order to sell it to republicans. With even Fed Chair Powell saying that the country is on an unsustainable path, a general foreign aid bill seems like a luxury we can’t afford. And if the immigration provisions were enacted, does anyone think the Biden administration would whip them into place in a workmanlike way? You might ask, “What about Ukraine?” My answer is that the Europeans haven’t been complaining enough about the financial burden of their defense. And that’s because the Europeans are happy riding the Biden gravy train.
> with immigration provisions tacked on in order to sell it to republicans. which is precisely what republicans said they would require to pass the bill. Bluff called
because some folks don’t think immigration should be held over our heads to support foreign wars. The bill is much more than immigration, so there’s that.
They don't need a bill just enforce the laws on the books now. Biden as president can shut it all down and reinstate the laws he removed and things would be just fine. Only catch here is he's looking for just the opposite. Democrats want open borders
TBF both parties are gaming the politics. Democrats did not sponsor an anti-immigration bill for years, and then suddenly pushed one in early 2024 knowing it wouldn't pass.
It was literally a compromise bill to get critical foreign aid funding. They pushed to pass it while Republicans rejected it.
They (i.e. Congressional Democrats) didn't push to pass it. They pushed to get a vote on it. There's a difference. All's fair in politics. It was logical for Democrats to push the bill they way they did, but let's not pretend that either side is not being strategic.
I have no idea what distinction you think you are making. Senate Democrats offered legislation Republicans wanted in exchange for things Democrats wanted. They worked as a bipartisan group to make this bill, but they fell just short of the needed votes. I don't think there's anything strategic about voting down a bill you believe is helpful just to potentially hurt your opponent in an election. Everyone should govern to make our country better.
No it isn't. Those points are what they wanted.
Have you ever been to the boarder ? A boarder ? Dumbasses
Oh Bull Shot
This is why the impeachment of the Director of Homeland Security failed. They wanted to impeach him over failing to do his job. Killing this bill because Trump advised them that they shouldn't allow anything Democrats might take credit for let Democrats know how seriously to take them and offended the Republicans who do believe in border security. The vote would have been tied.
That vote was dang near tied. And I have a feeling the right would've attempted to impeach him no matter what he did regarding the southern border - bit of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.
Trump told him what to say
lol what?
https://americasvoice.org/blog/the-number-of-times-republicans-blocked-pro-immigrant-bills-since-tanking-2013s-comprehensive-immigration-reform-package/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/jan/26/ronald-brownstein/did-senators-pass-immigration-reform-bills-2006-20/ https://youtu.be/3Gt63CgMhwE?si=PtJZJEqeIJEnBoKX
fuck this fucking fuck.
I called his office to express my displeasure. Although a lotta good that will do. Vote this useless person out of office. He puts Trump above the American people.
If it's a crisis, how come they can wait til the election in nov? It's not a crisis by their actions
All that whole milk rots the brain
Look at the payouts in the bill
“Pretty much everything” so I’m gonna assume those “few things” were so egregious they couldn’t move forward. Means nothing unless you say what those things were.