Shutdown over?

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,649
4,697
136
Totally lame. If we really meant for it to be temporary then these people should have been sent home long ago. The Salvadorans have been here since 2001 & earlier. Shipping them & their American citizen children off now is just racist cruelty. The same is true of the dreamers who were brought here as children.

Bah. What am I saying? They're just shitty brown people from shithole countries, right? Fuck 'em. Make America White again.

It was meant to be temporary, but they kicked the can down the road. Nothing racist about it. Just going with the original intent.

But keep playing that racist card.
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,254
16,729
136
Then they should pay for the wall fully funded, end chain immigration and beef up border security. Then later they can discuss DACA.

What about that, would that work for you?

No that is not a compromise, its like asking me to pay up front for all services when you are an unknown contractor.
 
Reactions: Younigue

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,022
2,872
136
It was meant to be temporary, but they kicked the can down the road. Nothing racist about it. Just going with the original intent.

But keep playing that racist card.

Can you provide evidence that DACA was intended to be temporary?
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
It was meant to be temporary, but they kicked the can down the road. Nothing racist about it. Just going with the original intent.

But keep playing that racist card.

Yeh, just fuckin' them now because it was the first time we could get around to it, obviously. It has nothing to do with Trump frothing up the very fine people in the Repub base over Islamic terrorists, Mexican rapists & shitty brown people from shithole countries stealin' Murricun jobs.

GWB let the Salvadorans into this country back in 2001, never even hinted at throwing them out. Obama did the same thing for 8 more years, but now they need to be dispossessed & deported for ... some kind of reason? Really? There is no reason other than spite.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
The problem is that your changes involve wholesale slaughter of innocents, fleeing sex slavery, murder, and other horrors from their countries of origin.

Or are you going to retract your statement about blowing up, and gunning down, desperate refugees?
What? You're trying to blackmail me into changing a political opinion? Go screw yourself.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
Funny how your link doesn't say what you think it says. Repubs don't want any of that or they'd already have concrete proposals. Mitch says he's thinking about it, though, but first he needs to divine Trump's mind from a distance. Repubs really like it just the way it is- stable cheap illegal workforce & a perma-issue for the White makes Right base to chew on. Win-win, & blame the Democrats.

Meanwhile, Trump will likely sign anything they send him & declare victory.
The Goodlatte Bill is a pretty reasonable compromise.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...atives_are_proposing_a_daca_deal__136028.html


"With President Trump’s blessing, various factions within the Republican Party are cracking the door open to an amnesty deal for illegal immigrants currently enrolled in the unlawful Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Last week, Reps. Bob Goodlatte, Michael McCaul, Raul Labrador and Martha McSally introduced a relatively narrow and targeted amnesty for current DACA recipients that would come alongside increased border security, robust internal enforcement, and 21st-century reforms to our nation’s legal immigration system called the Securing America’s Future Act.

To be clear, the Goodlatte bill does contain amnesty. Amnesty, as The Heritage Foundation explained in 2013, “comes in many forms, but in all its variations, it … treats law-breaking aliens better than law-following aliens.” Conservatives have rightly opposed amnesty in the past as a failed policy that is anathema to the rule of law, fundamentally unfair to Americans and would-be legal immigrants, and a magnet that attracts more illegal immigration in the future. Those critiques remain as true today as they have been in the past.


Given the unique political circumstances and the legal quagmire created by former President Obama’s unlawful actions, many congressional conservatives are contemplating how best to limit the scope of an amnesty and thus its damage, while also securing important changes to address security, protect sovereignty and enhance economic competitiveness. The shift is exemplified by Republican Study Committee Chairman Mark Walker and House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows urging the House to vote on the Securing America's Future Act.

So why are some House conservatives -- and many of their Senate colleagues -- opening the door to amnesty?

First, the Goodlatte amnesty provision is extremely narrow.
It would only allow illegal immigrants who currently have “deferred action on the basis of being brought to the U.S. as minors [to] get a 3-year renewable legal status allowing them to work and travel overseas.” In other words, there would be no permanent status or path to citizenship. And while the Pew Research Center estimated 1.1 million illegal immigrants were eligible for DACA in 2012, only 790,000 ultimately took advantage of the program and fewer than 690,000 remain in it. That number is about 94 percent smaller than the Bush- and Obama-era amnesty proposals, which would have resulted in upward of 11 million illegal immigrants being eligible for one of the greatest gifts imaginable: American citizenship.


Second, the Secure America’s Future Act would make the type of sweeping reforms to our nation’s immigration system that many conservatives have long sought. Perhaps most importantly, the bill would permanently end family-based chain migration by eliminating green card programs for relatives (other than spouses and
minor children). In doing so, it delivers on one of President Trump’s red lines from September 2017: “CHAIN MIGRATION cannot be allowed to be part of any legislation on Immigration!" As The Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano notes, “Our research supports efforts to end chain migration.”

The manner in which the Goodlatte bill addresses chain migration is important, and stands in stark contrast to discussions in the Senate. For example, Politico reported that “senators are proposing that undocumented parents who brought a child to the United States illegally would not be able to access a pathway to citizenship based on being sponsored by their children.” That is how moderate Republican senators plan “to address conservative concerns about ‘chain migration.’” This is the deal President Trump reportedly rejected late last week, which is good because conservatives entertaining the relatively narrow and targeted amnesty in the Secure America’s Future Act are unlikely to be swayed by such a limited proposal.

Additionally, the Goodlatte-McCaul-Labrador-McSally bill significantly increases internal enforcement of America’s immigration laws and enhances border security ............................."
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
Yeh, just fuckin' them now because it was the first time we could get around to it, obviously. It has nothing to do with Trump frothing up the very fine people in the Repub base over Islamic terrorists, Mexican rapists & shitty brown people from shithole countries stealin' Murricun jobs.

GWB let the Salvadorans into this country back in 2001, never even hinted at throwing them out. Obama did the same thing for 8 more years, but now they need to be dispossessed & deported for ... some kind of reason? Really? There is no reason other than spite.
The law was passed to be a temporary fix before the subjects were sent back to their countries. It was how it was passed and promoted by the Democrats to the country and it's why it passed. Now you move the goalposts, lie about the results and expect us to support it. Go screw yourself.
 

Younigue

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2017
5,888
1,446
106
The law was passed to be a temporary fix before the subjects were sent back to their countries. It was how it was passed and promoted by the Democrats to the country and it's why it passed. Now you move the goalposts, lie about the results and expect us to support it. Go screw yourself.
Yes tajjy, you're a full on deplorable.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,649
4,697
136
Yeh, just fuckin' them now because it was the first time we could get around to it, obviously. It has nothing to do with Trump frothing up the very fine people in the Repub base over Islamic terrorists, Mexican rapists & shitty brown people from shithole countries stealin' Murricun jobs.

GWB let the Salvadorans into this country back in 2001, never even hinted at throwing them out. Obama did the same thing for 8 more years, but now they need to be dispossessed & deported for ... some kind of reason? Really? There is no reason other than spite.

Yes that's it. You have it all figured out that "temporary" really means forever and we are all out to screw over the "brown people". I really thought we could get away with it, but you have outed the whole system. Darn it.

You are the one with a racial problem.
 

Younigue

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2017
5,888
1,446
106
Yes that's it. You have it all figured out that "temporary" really means forever and we are all out to screw over the "brown people". I really thought we could get away with it, but you have outed the whole system. Darn it.

You are the one with a racial problem.
If you mean the Trumpublican race of people, yup they're the absolute worst.

You're a disease pc.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Yes that's it. You have it all figured out that "temporary" really means forever and we are all out to screw over the "brown people". I really thought we could get away with it, but you have outed the whole system. Darn it.

You are the one with a racial problem.

So the justification for throwing them out 17 years into it is a technical point of the law? That's it? Just because we can then we should do it?

The Salvadorans & the Dreamers are innocent people who have done nothing wrong. They love this country in ways that only an immigrant can really understand. We can easily fold them right in to the greatness of America. Or we can be petty & vindictive chickenshits. Take your pick
 
Reactions: DarthKyrie
Jul 9, 2009
10,728
2,075
136
So the justification for throwing them out 17 years into it is a technical point of the law? That's it? Just because we can then we should do it?

The Salvadorans & the Dreamers are innocent people who have done nothing wrong. They love this country in ways that only an immigrant can really understand. We can easily fold them right in to the greatness of America. Or we can be petty & vindictive chickenshits. Take your pick
Great choice, we can either do what you want for your parties political benefit or we can be evil meanies. How about we compromise and change our immigration laws to be fair and even handed and better in the long term for our country AND then allow them to stay ?
 

Younigue

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2017
5,888
1,446
106
OK then, define temporary for me.
My feelings about you keeping your hands off my man are not temporary!

Or if a person with temporary status is here long enough to establish themselves, have and raise a family, contribute to society... leave them the fu*k alone! Don't be so completely and permanently a prick you'd throw them away.

Boom! Nailed it!
 
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Younigue

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2017
5,888
1,446
106
Great choice, we can either do what you want for your parties political benefit or we can be evil meanies. How about we compromise and change our immigration laws to be fair and even handed and better in the long term for our country AND then allow them to stay ?
Your party is already fu**ing that up.

To me you act as though you have no choice but to be an evil meanie. That's on you tajjy.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |