Christmas is not THE Christian HolidayWhat is there not to understand?
Christmas is not THE Christian HolidayWhat is there not to understand?
Oh, I guess that makes leaving people on a doorstep in freezing weather totally the thing Christ would want you to do then.Christmas is not THE Christian Holiday
It’s not a deflection. Poster was trying to make some virtue signaling point using Christianity and pretty much got it wrong :dunnoOh, I guess that makes leaving people on a doorstep in freezing weather totally the thing Christ would want you to do then.
Way to deflect to the least important part of the discussion.
It’s not a deflection. Poster was trying to make some virtue signaling point using Christianity and pretty much got it wrong :dunno
BTW…..those people had shelters on the ready and were expecting them. Kinda better than on the streets in a different city
I’m pretty sure you are the poster that gets VERY VERY specific with word choices and correcting people. Most Christians would understand Christmas isn’t THE Christian holiday at the same time most people understand a shelter in the NE is much better than the streets of El Paso.Not Captain Pedantic once again steering us off course.
Glad to see the cruelty and performative political stunt + performative religious piety are not lost on most.
I’m pretty sure you are the poster that gets VERY VERY specific with word choices and correcting people. Most Christians would understand Christmas isn’t THE Christian holiday at the same time most people understand a shelter in the NE is much better than the streets of El Paso.
Probably because none of you want to talk about the real story. none of you want to talk about the tens of thousands of migrants on the streets because their isn’t a place for them and shipping them to other states is what’s good for them. You also don’t want to talk about the reason behind so many homeless migrants and Democrats unwillingness to have a proper functioning border.Just stop. Nobody is talking about the s#!t you're trying to hide behind.
Probably because none of you want to talk about the real story. none of you want to talk about the tens of thousands of migrants on the streets because their isn’t a place for them and shipping them to other states is what’s good for them. You also don’t want to talk about the reason behind so many homeless migrants and Democrats unwillingness to have a proper functioning border.
Don’t read if you don’t want to and certainly no one makes you respond. But if your gonna, let’s talk the whole story and end the virtue signaling so we can have an honest conversation.
That’s quite the dipsy do there. I think most people want continued immigration. And the smart ones want to seal up the border at the same time. You see, it’s actually possible to do both things at the same time. It’s not an either or proposition.
There's a very compelling argument that sealing up the border has actually made things much worse.
A few decades ago most people illegally crossing the border only did so seasonally for work, and then headed back home. Clinton's IIRIRA bill, designed to cut down on illegal immigration, ballooned the problem and backfired horribly. There were a lot of parts to it, but the 3 and 10 year bars (if you'd lived here undocumented 6 months or more, you had to leave and be barred for 3 years before applying for lawful citizenship, if for more than 1 year, same thing but barred for 10 years). This even applied retroactively to people married to US citizens, people with work visas, sponsored by family, etc.
The idea was the punishments would be so severe to deter people doing it, but as we see all the time, punishment is not a deterrent, and it instead just incentivized people to stay undocumented. Undocumented people were about 50% likely to return back to Mexico before 1996, and now there's a nearly 0% statistical likelihood of them leaving. Number of undocumented immigrants has also more than doubled since then.
Sure, but until Trump, the security part was hardly addressed. How do we know this?? Because of the yearly inflow of mass illegal immigration.
There's no documented correlation or causation between rate of illegal immigration and how much or how little we have addressed security.
Our government has done a lot to address security. Operation Hold the Line, Operation Gatekeeper, anti smuggling units, BORSTAR, the BSI, formation of ICE, the DHS, etc. All within the last 30 years. Not to mention Border Security spending has gone from $263 million to $5 billion since 1990.
What’s the long term solution to border security that actually helps the problem?
Creating less incentive to cross or stay illegally and creating more incentive to be able to get access legally.
I really can’t take any argument seriously that has a premise of more border security is a bad thing.There's a very compelling argument that sealing up the border has actually made things much worse.
A few decades ago most people illegally crossing the border only did so seasonally for work, and then headed back home. Clinton's IIRIRA bill, designed to cut down on illegal immigration, ballooned the problem and backfired horribly. There were a lot of parts to it, but the 3 and 10 year bars (if you'd lived here undocumented 6 months or more, you had to leave and be barred for 3 years before applying for lawful citizenship, if for more than 1 year, same thing but barred for 10 years). This even applied retroactively to people married to US citizens, people with work visas, sponsored by family, etc.
The idea was the punishments would be so severe to deter people doing it, but as we see all the time, punishment is not a deterrent, and it instead just incentivized people to stay undocumented. Undocumented people were about 50% likely to return back to Mexico before 1996, and now there's a nearly 0% statistical likelihood of them leaving. Number of undocumented immigrants has also more than doubled since then.
It’s kind of strange that you think any regular posters here disagree with anything you just typed.I really can’t take any argument seriously that has a premise of more border security is a bad thing.
if you want a response, here it is…..beef up border security so we know who is and who isn’t coming across. It should be EXTREMELY hard to get into US undetected from Mexico to the point people can’t do it. At the same time increase the legal number of seasonal immigrants and full time immigrants each year enticing them to come across ports of entry. At the same time, modernize these ports of entry and the immigration judicial system so it works efficiently and processing doesn’t take years and years to complete.
You are correct that border security is better than it was in the 70’s and than in the 40’s and ‘20’s. That doesn’t address todays times though now does it? The seasonal worker ebb and flow of an open border doesn’t address the triangle immigrants coming that do not plan on going back now does it. No matter how you slice it, the country needs to know who is coming across our borders.
See my previous response.There's no documented correlation or causation between rate of illegal immigration and how much or how little we have addressed security.
Our government has done a lot to address security. Operation Hold the Line, Operation Gatekeeper, anti smuggling units, BORSTAR, the BSI, formation of ICE, the DHS, etc. All within the last 30 years. Not to mention Border Security spending has gone from $263 million to $5 billion since 1990.
At the same time we secure the border, I’m all for it.Creating less incentive to cross or stay illegally and creating more incentive to be able to get access legally.
Probably because none of you want to talk about the real story. none of you want to talk about the tens of thousands of migrants on the streets because their isn’t a place for them and shipping them to other states is what’s good for them. You also don’t want to talk about the reason behind so many homeless migrants and Democrats unwillingness to have a proper functioning border.
Since I’ve already acknowledged this, why are you asking the question again? R’s could very well meet some D demands on immigration in order to finish the much needed wall and implement Title 42 into codified law.f we walk through both immigration and U.S. homelessness on a macro scale, are you ready for the possibility that it can't all be blamed on Democrats?
Since I’ve already acknowledged this, why are you asking the question again? R’s could very well meet some D demands on immigration in order to finish the much needed wall and implement Title 42 into codified law.