Trump to sign national security funding bill, then declare State of Emergency

The laziness of calling everyone a lib who dares have a different opinion is truly tiresome. Especially from someone who recently ranted about "mindless robot that latches on to whatever"

Sure there is a small number of criminals coming across. There are plenty of criminals who are born here too. There will always criminals in society that no wall will ever fix. Even those seeing to protect have criminal elements inside them.

The wall is completely useless without real immigration reform. That is the true emergency but it doesn't make the headlines like Trump's Magical Maginot line
Call me a conservative and I'll take it as a compliment. Didn't realize calling a liberal a liberal was insulting so my apologies there.

You don't know how many criminals that are crossing. Also, you don't know how many will become criminals once they cross because of a lack of opportunities.

The wall is the first step to immigration reform. You can't have legal immigration when you can simply walk across unimpeded. You are either for the wall or you're for open borders. If you're for open borders just own it like Beto did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
Call me a conservative and I'll take it as a compliment. Didn't realize calling a liberal a liberal was insulting so my apologies there.

You don't know how many criminals that are crossing. Also, you don't know how many will become criminals once they cross because of a lack of opportunities.

The wall is the first step to immigration reform. You can't have legal immigration when you can simply walk across unimpeded. You are either for the wall or you're for open borders. If you're for open borders just own it like Beto did.


Come on, it's more complicated than that oversimplified choice of for a wall or for open borders. There is legit reason to feel that a wall is simply creating a false sense of security and is 80 percent a symbol of disdain for Hispanic illegal immigrants, maybe 20 percent real policy of preventing illegal immigration.
 
The laziness of calling everyone a lib who dares have a different opinion is truly tiresome. Especially from someone who recently ranted about "mindless robot that latches on to whatever"

Sure there is a small number of criminals coming across. There are plenty of criminals who are born here too. There will always criminals in society that no wall will ever fix. Even those sworn to protect have criminal elements inside them.

The wall is completely useless without real immigration reform. That is the true emergency but it doesn't make the headlines like Trump's Magical Maginot line
Everyone crossing the border illegally is a criminal, though they may not be violent criminals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and tennvols77
Call me a conservative and I'll take it as a compliment. Didn't realize calling a liberal a liberal was insulting so my apologies there
That's great you identify with one single ideology but you shouldn't assume everyone does. So many on here use it as an insult. Maybe you're not one but it sure reads like it
 
Come on, it's more complicated than that oversimplified choice of for a wall or for open borders. There is legit reason to feel that a wall is simply creating a false sense of security and is 80 percent a symbol of disdain for Hispanic illegal immigrants, maybe 20 percent real policy of preventing illegal immigration.
Was Obama showing his disdain for Hispanic illegal immigrants when he was championing a wall? How about Clinton or Bush? It is that simple. You can't have legal immigration when you can just walk across. It's like letting people into Neyland and then taking up their tickets. It doesn't work that way. That's what you liberals do. You demonize anything that Trump does or says. You demonize him for doing the same stuff your formal liberals did. Like I said, you liberals are the biggest racist on the planet and many of you don't even realize it.
 
Come on, it's more complicated than that oversimplified choice of for a wall or for open borders. There is legit reason to feel that a wall is simply creating a false sense of security and is 80 percent a symbol of disdain for Hispanic illegal immigrants, maybe 20 percent real policy of preventing illegal immigration.
It's hard to have honest conversation about a border wall while some continue to hold the narrative that it's somehow racist.
 
Everyone crossing the border illegally is a criminal, though they may not be violent criminals.
Then let's arrest, detain and prosecute fully all people who commit crimes on the same level. Agreed?
 
I know we've had countless posts about what we dont like about illegal immigration. Have we discussed whether we are for or against legal immigration; and what we ultimately want by allowing others to immigrate?
 
That's great you identify with one single ideology but you shouldn't assume everyone does. So many on here use it as an insult. Maybe you're not one but it sure reads like it
Conservatism is not one single ideology. Many call themselves libertarians and they are really liberals. Many call themselves conservatives but in truth are not really a conservative. Many would think I'm not a true conservative. If you find it offensive when someone refers to you as a lib, short for liberal, then maybe you should self examine. If I wanted to insult you I would use "Libtard" or one of the other popular terms of the day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
The wall is the first step to immigration reform. You can't have legal immigration when you can simply walk across unimpeded. You are either for the wall or you're for open borders. If you're for open borders just own it like Beto did.
Such a false dilemma you keep offering. It's not and had never been all or nothing

So where is the immigration reform discussion happening? Who has submitted their bills and where can we read them? If this is a national emergency I'm sure our reps are working diligently to address it. Trump's been there for a couple years so he must have offered more than a gorgeous Steel Slat Barrier
 
Then let's arrest, detain and prosecute fully all people who commit crimes on the same level. Agreed?
Well, I think trespassing charges usually depend on whether the landowner decides to prosecute. So if the landowners, in this case the U.S. govt., decides to prosecute, I guess they are well within their rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
It's hard to have honest conversation about a border wall while some continue to hold the narrative that it's somehow racist.


The wall is not inherently racist.

But it has been, and is, championed by Trump and others based on appeal to the worst in some people.
 
Conservatism is not one single ideology. Many call themselves libertarians and they are really liberals. Many call themselves conservatives but in truth are not really a conservative. Many would think I'm not a true conservative. If you find it offensive when someone refers to you as a lib, short for liberal, then maybe you should self examine. If I wanted to insult you I would use "Libtard" or one of the other popular terms of the day.
VN is a place where no one should take libtard as an insult because, 90% of the time, the poster using that insult tends to have a reading level rivaling that of an 8 year old.

It's kind of a calling card for people who get their political views from chain emails and Joe Rogan.
 
@Orange_Crush

Looking at past National Emergencies, I don't really see a correlation between them and what Trump is doing. Yes, past Presidents have declared emergencies, but I'm failing to see where they rise to the level of what Trump is doing.

Here's a list of the 31 national emergencies that have been in effect for years

Keep going back before the National Emergency Act passed in 1975. They passed that bill because Presidents had been enacting national emergencies and Congress felt they had been abusing the power and wanted more congressional oversight--i.e. Presidents had been enacting National Emergencies to do their job outside of Congressional power, and against Congressional wishes for over 100 years, so Congress passed their bill in 1975 putting controls on it. Yet, the controls they put on it were toothless and amounted to basically nothing more than keeping them informed, and Congress having to meet every so often during a national emergency.

So... Again... Presidents have been using National Emergencies to empower themselves at the expense of Congressional oversight and wishes for a couple of hundred years, including Truman who tried to nationalize the American steel industry against Congressional wishes, so much so that the Supreme Court blocked his attempt.

This is not a precedent from a "oh, no! He wants to do something Congress is against!" perspective. That's one thing the emergency powers are for; to give the President power over and above what Congress wishes. Now, if Congress wants to block Trump, they need to do what they did when it happened before with Truman, take it to the Supreme Court and block him. And if they didn't want the President to have the powers Trump is using, they shouldn't have passed the 1995 bill telling Trump exactly how to take the powers they passed in the bill.

What everyone should be really fighting mad about is that National Emergencies give the President to the power to subvert constitutional rights at any time he so chooses, and we have 37 active National Emergencies, left over from our previous few Presidents. In other words, they set up a continual state where they can rule as a dictator at any given time and no one cared before "but Trump!".
 
Conservatism is not one single ideology. Many call themselves libertarians and they are really liberals. Many call themselves conservatives but in truth are not really a conservative. Many would think I'm not a true conservative. If you find it offensive when someone refers to you as a lib, short for liberal, then maybe you should self examine. If I wanted to insult you I would use "Libtard" or one of the other popular terms of the day.
I never said it was offensive I said it's as tiresome as the left calling everyone a racist. If you want to have ab real discussion quit the backhanded name calling

Many call themselves libertarians and they are really liberals
this shows it's unlikely you understand either position. You simply like easy labels so you know what to disagree with.
 
I know we've had countless posts about what we dont like about illegal immigration. Have we discussed whether we are for or against legal immigration; and what we ultimately want by allowing others to immigrate?
I am 100% for legal immigration. You know what I do and I can not find quality labor for my business. I would sponsor someone that had the skills that I need in my business. I think we tackle illegal immigration four fold.

1. We construct a wall, at least at points where illegal crossings are problematic.
2. Anyone crossing illegally is immediately deported without a hearing and lose the chance to come legally for 5 years. ZERO benefits for illegal crossings.
3. Give people that have overstayed their VISA 6 months to either re-up their VISA or face immediate deportation without a hearing.
4. Speed up the legal immigration process and place restrictions on their ability to stay, must be employed or a student.
 
We finally agree on something. All people crossing illegally need to be arrested and detained.
No, all crimes of a similar nature must be enforced in the same exact way. Don't want any calls of hypocrisy do we? Let's load up the courts and jails!
 
Such a false dilemma you keep offering. It's not and had never been all or nothing

So where is the immigration reform discussion happening? Who has submitted their bills and where can we read them? If this is a national emergency I'm sure our reps are working diligently to address it. Trump's been there for a couple years so he must have offered more than a gorgeous Steel Slat Barrier

It is all or nothing. You either have a barrier or you don't care whether they come illegally. Just own it. You can't stop people from entering the country illegally without a physical barrier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
The wall is not inherently racist.

But it has been, and is, championed by Trump and others based on appeal to the worst in some people.
I don't agree with that. Pointing out that there are bad people illegally in this country is not appealing to the worst in people. As PJ suggested earlier, do we not have our own bad people to contend with? Why would we want bad people from other countries here? None of that suggests that ALL illegals are violent offenders, but the fact they've entered illegally means we know next to nothing about them. And I've seen no one come out against legal immigration.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennvols77
It is all or nothing. You either have a barrier or you don't care whether they come illegally. Just own it. You can't stop people from entering the country illegally without a physical barrier.
Without a real immigration policy the wall is worthless. It's an opiate to make scared little grandmas sleep better at night. Is like busting the corner dealer
 

VN Store



Back
Top