2016 Election
Quote: AZDuffmanReally? I'd suggest checking out sanctuary cities and calls for a general amnesty. Also the Obama Admin actively fighting local law enforcement when they enforce immigration law. Calls to allow them welfare, drivers licenses, and even to vote in local elections! Most of the Democrats and a few in the GOP seem to think Americans love it based on their actions.
This is the kind of positioning I'm talking about, if it isn't already clear from my last 2 posts.
Nobody.
Nowhere.
No how.
Is in favor of illegal immigration.
Is it still happening whether we "love" it or not? Yes.
There are a lot of different ideas on how to deal with it. You can build walls. You can put massive guards on patrol with dogs and machine guns. You can enforce existing laws. You can write new laws. You can identify them and put them on a path to legal immigration and/or being assets to THIS country. You can deport them. You can make it easier to immigrate here. Probably dozens of other things. You can even make things so bad for citizens in the US that people will stop wanting to come here. Seems like we're well on our way to achieving that one. :(
All of them have the same goal; reduce illegal immigration. All of them have positive and negative consequences. And each of them has its adherents.
The difference in the discourse during the problem-solving path to a solution is nonsense accusations like AZ (I'm using his post as an example, not making a personal attack on him) is making above weren't part of a reasonable discussion, back in the day; it was considered partisan noise and discounted as a distraction. Put people on the defensive, when there are different paths to a solution, or a combination of tactics that would lead to a more comprehensive solution, and they're too busy defending themselves to stay logical about their approach to the issue. Claim that a different solution to the same problem means your opponents support the problem continuing and you stop the problem from being identified and solved. Make distorted allegations of motive or allegiances from your opposing POV. And do it all often enough that people believe it. This is where people stop talking to each other now; instead, they're talking AT each other.
Quote: beachbumbabsThis is the kind of positioning I'm talking about, if it isn't already clear from my last 2 posts.
Nobody.
Nowhere.
No how.
Is in favor of illegal immigration.
See, I disagree here. The left has made it an issue where if you say anything, right up to the word "illegal alien" that you will be called a "racist" if you are against it. We have what now, 200+ declared "sanctuary cities" in the USA? We have groups who sue to say it is "unconstitutional" to deny illegal immigrants welfare and schooling? There are groups that leave food, water, and directions for illegal immigrants during their trips. These are actions strongly supporting illegal immigration. Of people who love it as it meet their needs or goals.
Quote:Is it still happening whether we "love" it or not? Yes.
It is happening because a portion of the population actively fights any efforts to stop it.
Quote:Make distorted allegations of motive or allegiances from your opposing POV. And do it all often enough that people believe it. This is where people stop talking to each other now; instead, they're talking AT each other.
This is exactly what I am saying the left is doing. Oppose illegal immigration and open borders and you are called a "racist" or "xenophobe." Ditto happens, including here, when you point out crimes committed by illegals or the fact that they are driving down the labor rate for locals. Try to solve the problem and the reply comes back, "racist, racist, racist, racist, racist..........."
Quote: 1BBThis great thread will soon knock the Hot Blonde Challenge thread off the Top Threads list. I, for one, won't be shedding any tears over it. A big shout out to Beethoven9th for starting this thread. Why is his name in red again?
Simply for being an asshole. And I believe I can say that now without being suspended, unlike the last time.
Quote: 1BBA big shout out to Beethoven9th for starting this thread. Why is his name in red again?
He is a troll that constantly insults members.
After being nuked and some time went by , the Wiz was kind enough to let him post over at DT
He was ok for a while but you know B9, after a while he went back to insulting.
The Wiz had enough and made it a permanent nuke, both sites
Quote: BozSimply for being an asshole. And I believe I can say that now without being suspended, unlike the last time.
Finally we can agree on something.
If "nobody" anywhere is in favor of illegal immigration, then why don't liberal officials and judges enforce the laws as they are written?Quote: beachbumbabsNobody. Nowhere. No how. Is in favor of illegal immigration.
Quote: SanchoPanzaIf "nobody" anywhere is in favor of illegal immigration, then why don't liberal officials and judges enforce the laws as they are written?
Libs want to find a way to get them to have citizenship because they feel that a large percentage of them will vote for them, conservatives don't want them to get citizenship because they feel a large portion of them will vote against them. Nothing more, nothing less
Quote: AZDuffmanSee, I disagree here. The left has made it an issue where if you say anything, right up to the word "illegal alien" that you will be called a "racist" if you are against it. We have what now, 200+ declared "sanctuary cities" in the USA? We have groups who sue to say it is "unconstitutional" to deny illegal immigrants welfare and schooling? There are groups that leave food, water, and directions for illegal immigrants during their trips. These are actions strongly supporting illegal immigration. Of people who love it as it meet their needs or goals.
It is happening because a portion of the population actively fights any efforts to stop it.
This is exactly what I am saying the left is doing. Oppose illegal immigration and open borders and you are called a "racist" or "xenophobe." Ditto happens, including here, when you point out crimes committed by illegals or the fact that they are driving down the labor rate for locals. Try to solve the problem and the reply comes back, "racist, racist, racist, racist, racist..........."
AZ,
And I would say to you that the Left is completely on the defensive, if that is their response (which I think is an unfair summation of what they're doing or saying). Both sides of the argument have painted themselves into simplistic soundbyte corners. Both sides have to drop the generalizations and mischaracterizations. This is not a simple problem, and there is no simple solution.
Personally, I would say that Trump is completely wrong about the generalizations of character and motivations of those coming from Mexico. Historically, those who make the effort to leave their homes for an unknown future have more imagination, gumption, and determination than the population they left behind. They have goals and aspirations and are willing to make them a reality, for themselves and their children. I can't say that's universally true about any group, any more than Trump can say those he's attacking are the garbage of Mexico, but that's how it works.
You look at the courage of the people who came to North America from Europe, then those who pioneered the plains, then settled the West. The Irish and Polish mass immigrations. The Cubans who, by the thousands, got into anything remotely seaworthy and much that wasn't after 1959. A hundred other examples, right up to those prime humans recently selected to colonize Mars among thousands of the best and the brightest willing to go. It's a culling that continues to repeat.
Yeah, there was the Mariela boat lift. And, yeah, Australia was first populated as a prison colony. It can probably be proven that Mexican criminals were encouraged to leave Mexico, perhaps specifically directed here. But I would argue the great majority of Mexicans coming north over a hundred years or more are good people with potential trying to improve their lives.
That is one hell of a craven reason to violate a number of extremely crucial laws of sovereignty. Almost as crass as selling fetal parts.Quote: Gabes22Libs want to find a way to get them to have citizenship because they feel that a large percentage of them will vote for them.
Quote: SanchoPanzaThat is one hell of a craven reason to violate a number of extremely crucial laws of sovereignty. Almost as crass as selling fetal parts.
Politics is all about power and that would help consolidate power. As with many things in life............follow the money
Quote:“Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed, to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.”
Yeah, and if not for us those puddle jumpers would be sprechen deutsch today.Quote: rxwineIt's always been a plot by France. While the Spanish and English fought, the French had a long term plan to bring us to our knees. An invitation.
Quote: beachbumbabs
Personally, I would say that Trump is completely wrong about the generalizations of character and motivations of those coming from Mexico. Historically, those who make the effort to leave their homes for an unknown future have more imagination, gumption, and determination than the population they left behind. They have goals and aspirations and are willing to make them a reality, for themselves and their children. I can't say that's universally true about any group, any more than Trump can say those he's attacking are the garbage of Mexico, but that's how it works.
You look at the courage of the people who came to North America from Europe, then those who pioneered the plains, then settled the West. The Irish and Polish mass immigrations. The Cubans who, by the thousands, got into anything remotely seaworthy and much that wasn't after 1959. A hundred other examples, right up to those prime humans recently selected to colonize Mars among thousands of the best and the brightest willing to go. It's a culling that continues to repeat.
Yeah, there was the Mariela boat lift. And, yeah, Australia was first populated as a prison colony. It can probably be proven that Mexican criminals were encouraged to leave Mexico, perhaps specifically directed here. But I would argue the great majority of Mexicans coming north over a hundred years or more are good people with potential trying to improve their lives.
I understand the point you are trying to make, but today's Mexican illegal is not the European immigrant of 100-150 years ago.
First, back then you immediately lost your connection to the old world. Yes, some went back. But this was hard and expensive. When you got here, you could send letters back home and receive them, otherwise that was it. No visits, no phone calls. No choice but to assimilate ASAP. When your kids went to school it was learn English or take the grade over. While most still lived in a ghetto of old world alikes, said ghettos were fairly small geographically and no one culture could overwhelm the majority culture. None of this is the case today.
There was no human trafficking to get people over here. By being so lax on illegal immigration the Obama Admin is actually supporting the coyotes and their OC networks. Then when the get here and work being charged for the bed they sleep, food they eat, and air they breathe all at nice markups. Sure, Irish worked in bad conditions and paid for overpriced tenements, but there was no debt servitude post-1865.
Also there was not a basket of freebies for immigrants pre-1964. Today the get here and the poverty-industrial complex is more than willing to hand over loads of your money and mine to them. Immigration is valuable to the country in that you get an adult who need not be schooled or otherwise have money spent to be productive, they are ready to work. Give welfare and that flips the equation. You then get a leech on the system, of which we home grow too many already.
Finally, crime. Illegal immigrant crime is ignored by the media, but it is there. Mexico is as we know our number one source of all kinds of dope in the USA. Other crimes as well. Simply a drain on the system. But this is the last thing the lamestream media will report.
We cannot just "be nice." We need to protect our borders.
Quote: AZDuffmanI understand the point you are trying to make, but today's Mexican illegal is not the European immigrant of 100-150 years ago.
First, back then you immediately lost your connection to the old world. Yes, some went back. But this was hard and expensive. When you got here, you could send letters back home and receive them, otherwise that was it. No visits, no phone calls. No choice but to assimilate ASAP. When your kids went to school it was learn English or take the grade over. While most still lived in a ghetto of old world alikes, said ghettos were fairly small geographically and no one culture could overwhelm the majority culture. None of this is the case today.
There was no human trafficking to get people over here. By being so lax on illegal immigration the Obama Admin is actually supporting the coyotes and their OC networks. Then when the get here and work being charged for the bed they sleep, food they eat, and air they breathe all at nice markups. Sure, Irish worked in bad conditions and paid for overpriced tenements, but there was no debt servitude post-1865.
Also there was not a basket of freebies for immigrants pre-1964. Today the get here and the poverty-industrial complex is more than willing to hand over loads of your money and mine to them. Immigration is valuable to the country in that you get an adult who need not be schooled or otherwise have money spent to be productive, they are ready to work. Give welfare and that flips the equation. You then get a leech on the system, of which we home grow too many already.
Finally, crime. Illegal immigrant crime is ignored by the media, but it is there. Mexico is as we know our number one source of all kinds of dope in the USA. Other crimes as well. Simply a drain on the system. But this is the last thing the lamestream media will report.
We cannot just "be nice." We need to protect our borders.
Very well said. But I particular like you first point which is of immense importance and too often overlooked.
People used to come here and want to blend in, learn the language, work hard, support the country. Now people are more obsessed with their country of orgin.
100 years ago nobody would move here from Finland, demand the schools develop a curriculum in Finnish, demand welfare, then even with all of those benifits claim that they are being treated unfairly.
People who entered illegally have no right to complain about anything. It's like if I trespassed on some random property and started squatting there and then sued the owners for not having HBO...
People break in, and then are more concerned about what they can get for free than they are about making the country as strong and functional as possible. It's the polar opposite of the immigrants attitude in the 1910s.
We need to stop caring about being politcally correct, and say of you don't belong here then you have no rights to any benifits. Border security is important, but dry up the well, and nobody will steal from it. People only come because their is inventive to do so. Start requiring strict citizenship verification for employment, do benifits, for IDs, allow local and state police to enforce immigration laws without all sorts of restrictions, and people will stop coming very quickly, and the ones here will self deport.
Quote: GandlerVery well said. But I particular like you first point which is of immense importance and too often overlooked.
People used to come here and want to blend in, learn the language, work hard, support the country. Now people are more obsessed with their country of orgin.
100 years ago nobody would move here from Finland, demand the schools develop a curriculum in Finnish, demand welfare, then even with all of those benifits claim that they are being treated unfairly.
This isn't true at all. Often times first generation immigrants didn't learn the language. Also Latinos are learning English faster then many other immigrant groups from the past http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2013/06/19/2179521/latinos-learn-english-faster/ . You are free to trot out the old canard about oh those immigrants will never integrate, but know that it was the same tired old argument used against every new immigrant group that comes along. The Irish will never integrate, the Germans will never integrate, the Italians will never integrate, the Chinese the Filipinos and the list goes on and on. Does your side ever get tired of being proven wrong when the group who will never integrate with the American culture is eventually taken into the fold and becomes a major part of it? After Latinos wonder what the next group that will never properly integrate into American culture.
Quote: TwirdmanThis isn't true at all. Often times first generation immigrants didn't learn the language. Also Latinos are learning English faster then many other immigrant groups from the past http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2013/06/19/2179521/latinos-learn-english-faster/ . You are free to trot out the old canard about oh those immigrants will never integrate, but know that it was the same tired old argument used against every new immigrant group that comes along. The Irish will never integrate, the Germans will never integrate, the Italians will never integrate, the Chinese the Filipinos and the list goes on and on. Does your side ever get tired of being proven wrong when the group who will never integrate with the American culture is eventually taken into the fold and becomes a major part of it? After Latinos wonder what the next group that will never properly integrate into American culture.
The source looks like a very far left-wing site. Show all the studies you like. I will counter with demands for bilingual education and how many times we hear "press 1 for Spanish." Also the number of times I had to use translations and find Spanish-speaking notaries to get a mortgage done.
Maybe you can also explain the growth of Univision and other Spanish-language broadcasts if all these immigrants are learning english and assimilating at such a rapid clip?
Show all the studies you like, life on the street shows different.
Quote: TwirdmanThis isn't true at all. Often times first generation immigrants didn't learn the language. Also Latinos are learning English faster then many other immigrant groups from the past http://thinkprogress.org/immigration/2013/06/19/2179521/latinos-learn-english-faster/ . You are free to trot out the old canard about oh those immigrants will never integrate, but know that it was the same tired old argument used against every new immigrant group that comes along. The Irish will never integrate, the Germans will never integrate, the Italians will never integrate, the Chinese the Filipinos and the list goes on and on. Does your side ever get tired of being proven wrong when the group who will never integrate with the American culture is eventually taken into the fold and becomes a major part of it? After Latinos wonder what the next group that will never properly integrate into American culture.
I never claimed anything about any particular group.
I come from a family of immigrants who worked extremely hard to integrate. And, you would be hard pressed to find anyone more pro-American and nationalistic than me.
I don't care where you are from, if you want to be here as much as you claim then at least attempt to support the culture.
Many immigrants integrate extremely well, some of the most pro American people I know are first generation immigrants. However, some put their home country before where they are trying to move to.
Quote: AZDuffmanThe source looks like a very far left-wing site. Show all the studies you like. I will counter with demands for bilingual education and how many times we hear "press 1 for Spanish." Also the number of times I had to use translations and find Spanish-speaking notaries to get a mortgage done.
Maybe you can also explain the growth of Univision and other Spanish-language broadcasts if all these immigrants are learning english and assimilating at such a rapid clip?
Show all the studies you like, life on the street shows different.
So more of that down home folksy wisdom rather than actual studies or actual facts. Who needs reality when you got your gut instinct right.
Also just because they speak English and have assimilated doesn't mean they have to completely give up their own culture. Filipinos learn English when in elementary school in the Philippines so basically every immigrant from the Philippines knows English fluently yet many of them still watch the Tagalog channel or various other Filipino channels.
Also just because someone is fluent in a language does not mean that is the language they are most natural in. Some people are simply more adept at their first language so if possible choose to communicate in that language.
Also growing up in the central valley I also so plenty of things written in Hmong or Vietnamese or other Indochinese languages. First generation immigrants do try and learn the language but it is a slow arduous process especially since we've eliminated free schooling to teach English.
Advice your gut is great for telling you if you're hungry or not for everything else you should probably use your brain and actual facts.
Many official documents in Las Vegas are printed in three languages, English, Spanish and Tagalog. Teaching English in elementary school does not seem successful, based on more than 50 years of doing just that in Puerto Rico, along with other Latin American countries.Quote: TwirdmanFilipinos learn English when in elementary school in the Philippines so basically every immigrant from the Philippines knows English fluently yet many of them still watch the Tagalog channel or various other Filipino channels.
Quote: SanchoPanzaMany official documents in Las Vegas are printed in three languages, English, Spanish and Tagalog. Teaching English in elementary school does not seem successful, based on more than 50 years of doing just that in Puerto Rico, along with other Latin American countries.
Yes and this does not mean that they cannot speak English. There is a difference between not being proficient in English and being more proficient in your first language. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/filipino-immigrants-united-states#12 less than 1% of Filipinos cannot speak English and even if you go with those who say they don't speak it well that is only an extra 7%. They have it in tagalog not because Filipinos are less likely to speak English but because they are probably one of the largest immigrant groups.
I grew up near Filipino immigrants my entire life and the only ones i knew who didn't have a very firm grasp of English were the parents of first generation immigrants that were petitioned over by their children.
Self-reporting for the Census is nowhere near definitive.Quote: TwirdmanYes and this does not mean that they cannot speak English. There is a difference between not being proficient in English and being more proficient in your first language. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/filipino-immigrants-united-states#12 less than 1% of Filipinos cannot speak English and even if you go with those who say they don't speak it well that is only an extra 7%.
Quote: TwirdmanSo more of that down home folksy wisdom rather than actual studies or actual facts. Who needs reality when you got your gut instinct right.
Lets just say I am going to believe what I see with my own eyes over what a report says I am supposed to be seeing.
Quote:Advice your gut is great for telling you if you're hungry or not for everything else you should probably use your brain and actual facts.
I do use my brain and actual facts. You are saying I should use someone else's brain. Anyone with half a brain can see assimilation is not happening nearly to the level of previous generations and a subculture is forming. Of course this is harder to see when your nose is in some study and not up and looking around.
Quote: AZDuffmanLets just say I am going to believe what I see with my own eyes over what a report says I am supposed to be seeing.
I do use my brain and actual facts. You are saying I should use someone else's brain. Anyone with half a brain can see assimilation is not happening nearly to the level of previous generations and a subculture is forming. Of course this is harder to see when your nose is in some study and not up and looking around.
I'll tell you what-you will NEVER see documents in Spanish in China, Japan, Taiwan or Korea. They know full well that not "all humans are legal". Closed borders Asia is rising, black and hispanic majority America is in decline.
Must be a coincidence.
Quote: AZDuffmanLets just say I am going to believe what I see with my own eyes over what a report says I am supposed to be seeing.
I do use my brain and actual facts. You are saying I should use someone else's brain. Anyone with half a brain can see assimilation is not happening nearly to the level of previous generations and a subculture is forming. Of course this is harder to see when your nose is in some study and not up and looking around.
Not really. You act like all previous generations immediately integrated into American culture this is patently absurd. Have you never heard of Little Italy, Little China, Little Korea town and all the other basically segregated cities that new immigrants migrate to. Also how many large waves of immigration were you actually alive to see? I mean if you are in your 40s you might have been alive for the large Indochinna immigration after Vietnam, but other than that not really many large scale immigration have been in your lifetime.
You are basing your views on what you think immigrants did and the idealized immigrant rather then what actually occurred.
If assimilation was as quick as you claim it why was there with every new wave of immigrants a cry of this new group will never assimilate.
The big difference is that the vast preponderance of those immigrants were legal and made lifelong commitments to be Americans in the U.S.Quote: TwirdmanNot really. You act like all previous generations immediately integrated into American culture this is patently absurd. Have you never heard of Little Italy, Little China, Little Korea town and all the other basically segregated cities that new immigrants migrate to. Also how many large waves of immigration were you actually alive to see? I mean if you are in your 40s you might have been alive for the large Indochinna immigration after Vietnam, but other than that not really many large scale immigration have been in your lifetime.
Quote: SanchoPanzaThe big difference is that the vast preponderance of those immigrants were legal and made lifelong commitments to be Americans in the U.S.
This is because legal immigration was significantly easier than. I've already mentioned several times how it is basically impossible to legally immigrate to the US now unless you have family members here and even with family members if they are not immediate family it is a significant amount of difficulty.
Saying they came here legally when there were very few if any laws concerning immigration isn't really very meaningful.
Quote: TwirdmanNot really. You act like all previous generations immediately integrated into American culture this is patently absurd. Have you never heard of Little Italy, Little China, Little Korea town and all the other basically segregated cities that new immigrants migrate to. Also how many large waves of immigration were you actually alive to see? I mean if you are in your 40s you might have been alive for the large Indochinna immigration after Vietnam, but other than that not really many large scale immigration have been in your lifetime.
They do not compare. The number of people involved is tiny compared to the number of illegal aliens entering from Mexico today. Yes, I heard of Little Italy, Little Havana, and others. Again it does not compare. 100 years ago were Americans asked not to show USA patriotism on May 5th so as not to "offend" the newcomers? That is happening today.
To repeat, no previous group could return home and come back with a simple bus ticket. No previous group sent billions of dollars out of the USA back home. No group prior to 1965 had the welfare state handouts we have today. All prior groups came LEGALLY.
Culture clash is coming to the USA. It will not be pretty. OTOH we may get lucky and California asks to leave the union.
Quote: TwirdmanThis is because legal immigration was significantly easier than. I've already mentioned several times how it is basically impossible to legally immigrate to the US now unless you have family members here and even with family members if they are not immediate family it is a significant amount of difficulty.
Saying they came here legally when there were very few if any laws concerning immigration isn't really very meaningful.
So what? It was a different time then. Today we have different needs. Back then there was a labor shortage and plenty of lands that needed settled. Today this is not so. It used to be that an American could walk right up to the front door of the White House.
Heroin was once legal, as was cocaine.
Times change.
Lawlessness is being endorsed when laws that one does not like are on the books and people decide that they will not follow them. In that event, there is no good reason to stop with the immigration and naturalization laws. I would like to ignore some laws, too. Let's start with motor vehicle statutes.Quote: TwirdmanThis is because legal immigration was significantly easier than.
Quote: SanchoPanza...I would like to ignore some laws, too. Let's start with motor vehicle statutes.
The extortion of paying taxes is second on that list.
Quote: SanchoPanzaI would like to ignore some laws, too. Let's start with motor vehicle statutes.
Maybe use my backyard to grow something other than Silver Queen for resale?
Quote: AZDuffmanIf the Obama administration does not love illegal immigration, why do they stop immigration enforcement?
Washington Times is shit, but other than that forcing the use of interpreters is not the same things as stopping the enforcement of immigration laws. There are people here legally who do not speak English or at least do not speak English well. To guarantee they get fair treatment and know their rights we need to have interpreters.
Obama has moved more immigration enforcement towards the federal rather than local law enforcement but the laws are still being enforced.
Quote: TwirdmanQuote: AZDuffmanIf the Obama administration does not love illegal immigration, why do they stop immigration enforcement?
Washington Times is shit, but other than that forcing the use of interpreters is not the same things as stopping the enforcement of immigration laws. There are people here legally who do not speak English or at least do not speak English well. To guarantee they get fair treatment and know their rights we need to have interpreters.
Obama has moved more immigration enforcement towards the federal rather than local law enforcement but the laws are still being enforced.
Read the entire article and if you must google more of how Obama has stopped Maricopa County from enforcing immigration laws. Their actions against the county are as if they said, "Stop arresting people for selling meth and let us handle it. Sorry, but we do not care about the quality of life of your citizens."
By the number of illegals in the USA, the laws are anything but being enforced.
Quote:American objections to Chinese immigration took many forms, and generally stemmed from economic and cultural tensions, as well as ethnic discrimination. ]Most Chinese laborers who came to the United States did so in order to send money back to China to support their families there. At the same time, they also had to repay loans to the Chinese merchants who paid their passage to America. These financial pressures left them little choice but to work for whatever wages they could. Non-Chinese laborers often required much higher wages to support their wives and children in the United States, and also generally had a stronger political standing to bargain for higher wages. Therefore many of the non-Chinese workers in the United States came to resent the Chinese laborers, who might squeeze them out of their jobs. Furthermore, as with most immigrant communities, many Chinese settled in their own neighborhoods, and tales spread of Chinatowns as places where large numbers of Chinese men congregated to visit prostitutes, smoke opium, or gamble. Some advocates of anti-Chinese legislation therefore argued that admitting Chinese into the United States lowered the cultural and moral standards of American society. Others used a more overtly racist argument for limiting immigration from East Asia, and expressed concern about the integrity of American racial composition.
To address these rising social tensions, from the 1850s through the 1870s the California state government passed a series of measures aimed at Chinese residents, ranging from requiring special licenses for Chinese businesses or workers to preventing naturalization. Because anti-Chinese discrimination and efforts to stop Chinese immigration violated the 1868 Burlingame-Seward Treaty with China, the federal government was able to negate much of this legislation.
In 1879, advocates of immigration restriction succeeded in introducing and passing legislation in Congress to limit the number of Chinese arriving to fifteen per ship or vessel. Republican President Rutherford B. Hayes vetoed the bill because it violated U.S. treaty agreements with China. Nevertheless, it was still an important victory for advocates of exclusion. Democrats, led by supporters in the West, advocated for all-out exclusion of Chinese immigrants. Although Republicans were largely sympathetic to western concerns, they were committed to a platform of free immigration. In order to placate the western states without offending China, President Hayes sought a revision of the Burlingame-Seward Treaty in which China agreed to limit immigration to the United States.
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/chinese-immigration
Quote: rxwineGlad the parties have switched sides.
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/chinese-immigration
Yep the start of the quota system in the US one of the first steps to the dismantlement of legal immigration to the US. Also more proof that AZ was totally wrong about immigrants not saying money back to their country of origin. Something that by no means originate with the Latinos and had been done over a hundred years earlier by Chinese immigrants. Also quite popular among Filipino immigrants.
To make it more clear everything that AZ has said is unique to the modern day Latino immigrants was commonplace for immigrants going back who knows how long.
Quote: TwirdmanYep the start of the quota system in the US one of the first steps to the dismantlement of legal immigration to the US. Also more proof that AZ was totally wrong about immigrants not saying money back to their country of origin. Something that by no means originate with the Latinos and had been done over a hundred years earlier by Chinese immigrants. Also quite popular among Filipino immigrants.
I said that previous groups did not send billions back. Obviously some money has always been sent back, but nowhere near the levels of today. Have fun trying to play "GOTCHA" all you like. It is not going to work. The current immigration is different in multiple respects to previous waves. Any reasonable person should see this. Those who are in favor of illegal immigration and open borders however will defend both to the bitter end.
Quote: AZDuffmanI said that previous groups did not send billions back. Obviously some money has always been sent back, but nowhere near the levels of today. Have fun trying to play "GOTCHA" all you like. It is not going to work. The current immigration is different in multiple respects to previous waves. Any reasonable person should see this. Those who are in favor of illegal immigration and open borders however will defend both to the bitter end.
OK well lets look at modern day immigrants then. US immigrants send about 120 billion a year to other countries. Of that Mexico does get the most at 23 billion. You also have the Philippines sending back 10 billion. China sending back 13 billion. India almost 11 billion. http://www.amren.com/news/2013/02/immigrants-in-the-u-s-sending-120b-back-home/
So again hardly just Latino immigrants sending money back to their home country not even if you further specify it to only include billions of dollars sent over.
Cannot find data on historic immigrants but again many Chinese immigrants came specifically to send money back to China and possibly return after they made their fortune.
The Phillipines was sending 2.5 billion in 1995 they broke the 1 billion mark in 1985. http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/global-remittances-guide sadly that data only dates back to 1970 so that is only data point I could really have. So again you are wrong about immigrants and should start relying on actual data rather then what you think you know.
Quote: TwirdmanOK well lets look at modern day immigrants then. US immigrants send about 120 billion a year to other countries. Of that Mexico does get the most at 23 billion. You also have the Philippines sending back 10 billion. China sending back 13 billion. India almost 11 billion. http://www.amren.com/news/2013/02/immigrants-in-the-u-s-sending-120b-back-home/
So again hardly just Latino immigrants sending money back to their home country not even if you further specify it to only include billions of dollars sent over.
Nobody is saying it is "only" latinos. I am saying they send the most and it is a net loser for the economy when they do. I am not keen on OTM illegals, either, BTW. Mexican illegals are, however, the biggest group. Currently 10% of Mexicans are living in the USA as illegal aliens. Seriously, when do you admit we have a problem?
Quote: renoTrump hasn't figured it out.
Sure he has. I can't believe he's sucked
in so many people into his vortex. He
knows he can't win, this is all about free
publicity for his brand. He's at 17%? On
this date in 2011, Herman Cain was at
27%, did he win the nomination?
The lack of even a "shit" citation is notable. At any rate, here is just one report from the front lines and culled from among many sources, Congressional hearings, about cooking burritos and changing diapers instead of catching El Chapo and the Zetas' forces:Quote: TwirdmanWashington Times is shit, but other than that forcing the use of interpreters is not the same things as stopping the enforcement of immigration laws. . . . Obama has moved more immigration enforcement towards the federal rather than local law enforcement but the laws are still being enforced.
"As the Obama administration scrambles to respond to an influx of unaccompanied minors across the Mexican border into Texas, the union that represents 16,500 border patrol officers has made its frustration clear. “New annual job rating areas: Babysitting, Diaper Changing, Burrito Wrapping, Cleaning cells. Law Enforcement? What’s that? #lowmorale” the group wrote on its Twitter feed last weekend. . . .
“Nothing in there was racist,” union president Brandon Judd said in an interview, referring to the tweet. “All he was trying to emphasize is that we can’t do our jobs. Forty percent of our agents have been pulled from the field to babysit, clean cells, change diapers. We’re actually making burritos. That’s not our job. Our job is to protect the border.”
"The patrol agents have" warned "in Congressional hearings and on cable news shows that resources to combat drug and weapons trafficking have been diverted to handling the immigrant children. Judd told a House panel that the crisis is straining the border patrol “to the breaking point.” wapo
Quote: SanchoPanzaThe lack of even a "shit" citation is notable. At any rate, here is just one report from the front lines and culled from among many sources, Congressional hearings, about cooking burritos and changing diapers instead of catching El Chapo and the Zetas' forces:
"As the Obama administration scrambles to respond to an influx of unaccompanied minors across the Mexican border into Texas, the union that represents 16,500 border patrol officers has made its frustration clear. “New annual job rating areas: Babysitting, Diaper Changing, Burrito Wrapping, Cleaning cells. Law Enforcement? What’s that? #lowmorale” the group wrote on its Twitter feed last weekend. . . .
“Nothing in there was racist,” union president Brandon Judd said in an interview, referring to the tweet. “All he was trying to emphasize is that we can’t do our jobs. Forty percent of our agents have been pulled from the field to babysit, clean cells, change diapers. We’re actually making burritos. That’s not our job. Our job is to protect the border.”
"The patrol agents have" warned "in Congressional hearings and on cable news shows that resources to combat drug and weapons trafficking have been diverted to handling the immigrant children. Judd told a House panel that the crisis is straining the border patrol “to the breaking point.” wapo
That story is over a year old. (your link is messed up as well)
One talking head said Bush is taking no chances and preparing hard for Trump. Which is smart really. Any hint that Trump is a non-serious candidate and he successfully takes down one of the front runners is not going to go unnoticed.
Quote: EvenBobHe's at 17%? On
this date in 2011, Herman Cain was at
27%, did he win the nomination?
Where are you getting your numbers from EB?
The closest I could find was a CNN poll on July 22, 2011
Romney 16
Perry 14
Rudy Giuliani 13
Sarah Palin 13
Michele Bachman 12
Ron Paul 8
Herman Cain 6
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/22/cnn-poll-perry-near-the-top-in-gop-nomination-race/
My recollection is that Herman Cain led one or 2 'outlier' type polls, but it was much earlier in the cycle than this, like in the spring of 2011, and I don't think he EVER had 27%. By this time (july) in the 2011, Romney was leading, although it was a slight lead in most national polls.
Quote: EvenBobSure he has. I can't believe he's sucked
in so many people into his vortex. He
knows he can't win, this is all about free
publicity for his brand. He's at 17%? On
this date in 2011, Herman Cain was at
27%, did he win the nomination?
Agreed. I'm glad not everyone on the right is drinking the Trump flavored Kool-Aid.
