politics thread

[Stymietee]

You are aware that the Rio Grande flows along the Texas/Mexico border right? It is the line that separates the 2 countries along that section of the border. And the wall will be built on our side of the river in Texas. So yeah it will wall off the entire Rio Grande to Americans that rely on that river.

Here's the thing, any wall that will be built will in effect be built on lands belonging to the United States. That strip of land on the opposite side of the wall (non-U.S. side) will have a portion of land that still belongs to the U.S., that is until... the wall is completed. At that point this country will have effectively ceded land to Mexico. Does anybody truly favor the idea of ceding one inch of the United States to Mexico?

 

[Stymietee]

They are human beings, but would you propose we do? Last month was the largest influx of illegals get caught crossing the southwestern border in over 6 years. Over 50,000 were apprehended by BPS. How would you propose we care for these huge amounts? Would you be willing to house and care for 10 or 12 until we can figure out who they are and what to do with them?

Doesn't this say more about the current policy vs the one that was working before it?

 

[Stymietee]

Hold on...so you believe we apprehend every illegal crosser? You can only count those you catch.

At first I didn't catch on, you're trying to be funny! (if not please read what I actually wrote in context, and not something that you've injected)

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

I have walked right up on it , have you ? And I know they have access to it

If there is a wall the river will be shut off. What part of that is confusing? Walking up to river as it stands now without the wall means nothing, not sure why you felt the need to challenge me there.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Nobody is putting you ALL in the same box, but your democratic leaders run the party and this is what they are for. You vote for them, then you are for that.

Nobody has ever said ban all Muslims. Banning people from terrorist supporting nations, that happen to be Muslim majority nations, makes sense. We aren’t banning them because they are amuslim nations. We are banning them because of the nations support of terrorism. Explain why people weren’t upset when Obama was going to ban people from those same nations. It is the hypocrisy that upends every argument you make.

Wait now hold on. Talk about hypocrisy, I could make a whole lot of comments about that with regard to the Trump group.

As for the ban on all Muslims I never said he did that. I said he put a ban on entry from Muslim countries and all that does is punished the masses for the actions of the few. Do you have any idea how unfair it is that a man in this country can not go home to see his dying mother because he happens to be from one of those banned countries? And that is just one of 100,000 examples. As I said he punished the masses for the actions of the few and I believe that is wrong.

As for what Obama did he restricted the travel of certain individuals who have visited those 7 nations. We were targeting individuals. What Trump did was the nuclear option, to ban travel for EVERYONE to and from those nations. Not even close to the same thing.

And finally Dems are not for open borders. You need to stop with that. If they voted to have illegals vote, well that's not exactly an open border now is it? Obama and Hillary voted for stronger border control over and over again.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

i remember a time not long ago that shark and DGF and ebb would actually talk about redskins football . we just made a big signing and nothing from either of you 3 . dont get bogged down in BS politics all the time . expand , expand expand

I visit the politics board because there is a clear divide and it's interesting to debate with people on the other side. The reason I left the Redskins board is because we are all supposed to be on the same team but it never appeared that way. Well that and GK saying when I spoke up about all the bitching "well.....bye". That pissed me off.

 

[skinsdad62]

It doesnt. It gets rid of the need, or desire to sneak in unless someone is actually coming here to break the law. It allows us to use the funds we are currently wasting to try and make people feel unwelcome, to do things like actual border security. We arent then wasting BILLIONS of dollars housing people to try and kick them out of the country when they could be working and assisting in making America better.

No it wont , won’t stop the need at all

 

[skinsdad62]

Wait now hold on. Talk about hypocrisy, I could make a whole lot of comments about that with regard to the Trump group.

As for the ban on all Muslims I never said he did that. I said he put a ban on entry from Muslim countries and all that does is punished the masses for the actions of the few. Do you have any idea how unfair it is that a man in this country can not go home to see his dying mother because he happens to be from one of those banned countries? And that is just one of 100,000 examples. As I said he punished the masses for the actions of the few and I believe that is wrong.

As for what Obama did he restricted the travel of certain individuals who have visited those 7 nations. We were targeting individuals. What Trump did was the nuclear option, to ban travel for EVERYONE to and from those nations. Not even close to the same thing.

And finally Dems are not for open borders. You need to stop with that. If they voted to have illegals vote, well that's not exactly an open border now is it? Obama and Hillary voted for stronger border control over and over again.

Wrong Obama banned all of them . And both gave flipped because of you know who

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

They are human beings, but would you propose we do? Last month was the largest influx of illegals get caught crossing the southwestern border in over 6 years. Over 50,000 were apprehended by BPS. How would you propose we care for these huge amounts? Would you be willing to house and care for 10 or 12 until we can figure out who they are and what to do with them?

Oh I understand the burden. But we can start with the President calling illegals "animals". I saw the clip, he may have meant gang members but that's not what he said, again when you make a blanket statement about an entire group based on the actions of a few you are wrong. Next we had the cruel and unnecessary move of separating children from their parents. Sure it was necessary in some instances and has been done in the past. But this time it appeared to be a deliberate attempt to punish children who did nothing wrong other than follow a parent who was simply trying to give them a better life.

I recognize the need for the control of illegals. I understand the drain they put on our country. What I don't approve of is the hate from the right as they treat these people as sub human. I'm sure they would all love to enter legally but that is obviously not possible. When you are dirt poor with no future in their own country I can see why they would be desperate enough to attempt to come here. Again I'm not supporting that we just let them all in, I just have more compassion for their situation that the right who wants to round them all up and process them like livestock.

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

Wrong Obama banned all of them . And both gave flipped because of you know who

FACT CHECK: Did the Obama Administration Select the Countries Affected by President Trump's Immigration Order?


What's False
The 2015 bill was attached as a rider to a "must pass" omnibus spending bill and did not create an outright ban on entry into the U.S. from designated countries.

 

[skinsdad62]

FACT CHECK: Did the Obama Administration Select the Countries Affected by President Trump's Immigration Order?


What's False
The 2015 bill was attached as a rider to a "must pass" omnibus spending bill and did not create an outright ban on entry into the U.S. from designated countries.

A george Soros owned fact check site is an unacceptable source

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

A george Soros owned fact check site is an unacceptable source

You will reject every one of my sources so what's the point of debating?

 

[reptec101]

Oh I understand the burden. But we can start with the President calling illegals "animals". I saw the clip, he may have meant gang members but that's not what he said, again when you make a blanket statement about an entire group based on the actions of a few you are wrong. Next we had the cruel and unnecessary move of separating children from their parents. Sure it was necessary in some instances and has been done in the past. But this time it appeared to be a deliberate attempt to punish children who did nothing wrong other than follow a parent who was simply trying to give them a better life.

I recognize the need for the control of illegals. I understand the drain they put on our country. What I don't approve of is the hate from the right as they treat these people as sub human. I'm sure they would all love to enter legally but that is obviously not possible. When you are dirt poor with no future in their own country I can see why they would be desperate enough to attempt to come here. Again I'm not supporting that we just let them all in, I just have more compassion for their situation that the right who wants to round them all up and process them like livestock.

Son, if you can't grasp who the man was talking about when calling gang members animals then you are seriously lost in the world of liberalism. No disrespect but dude,,, seriously. Advice: Go to youtube and watch the whole clip after viewing it for the first time on MSNBC... you'll be enlightened.

 

[handicappers]

Wait now hold on. Talk about hypocrisy, I could make a whole lot of comments about that with regard to the Trump group.

As for the ban on all Muslims I never said he did that. I said he put a ban on entry from Muslim countries and all that does is punished the masses for the actions of the few. Do you have any idea how unfair it is that a man in this country can not go home to see his dying mother because he happens to be from one of those banned countries? And that is just one of 100,000 examples. As I said he punished the masses for the actions of the few and I believe that is wrong.

As for what Obama did he restricted the travel of certain individuals who have visited those 7 nations. We were targeting individuals. What Trump did was the nuclear option, to ban travel for EVERYONE to and from those nations. Not even close to the same thing.

And finally Dems are not for open borders. You need to stop with that. If they voted to have illegals vote, well that's not exactly an open border now is it? Obama and Hillary voted for stronger border control over and over again.

lol

 

[handicappers]

A george Soros owned fact check site is an unacceptable source

simply not true

 

[skinsdad62]

simply not true

100 % true ,snopes is left wing

 

[j_y19]

Oh I understand the burden. But we can start with the President calling illegals "animals". I saw the clip, he may have meant gang members but that's not what he said, again when you make a blanket statement about an entire group based on the actions of a few you are wrong. Next we had the cruel and unnecessary move of separating children from their parents. Sure it was necessary in some instances and has been done in the past. But this time it appeared to be a deliberate attempt to punish children who did nothing wrong other than follow a parent who was simply trying to give them a better life.

I recognize the need for the control of illegals. I understand the drain they put on our country. What I don't approve of is the hate from the right as they treat these people as sub human. I'm sure they would all love to enter legally but that is obviously not possible. When you are dirt poor with no future in their own country I can see why they would be desperate enough to attempt to come here. Again I'm not supporting that we just let them all in, I just have more compassion for their situation that the right who wants to round them all up and process them like livestock.

You are using the term "right" as all inclusive? Didn't you complain about GK doing the same in an earlier post for the left?

So I ask again, what should we be doing with those we apprehend? How should we handle them? Is it really subhuman? We give them shelter, food, water, medical treatment. That right there is much more than many had at home or surely on their trek here.

I'm not saying its an ideal situation and the separating of families should not occur if at all possible and is a mistake. but there is a reason why we adopted this policy (during the Obama years and carried over with Trump). It was for the safety of the kids. Many were being abused and had to be separated for their safety.

 

[skinsdad62]

You will reject every one of my sources so what's the point of debating?

Then don’t throw out left wing sites and call them valid

So when I throw out a breitbart story and present that as fact you will bite off on it ? Or Fox News ? Or Rush ? Doubtful

 

[skinsdad62]

I will give you the same challenge DGF I gave shark ebb and others

The first 1 ) Sit down for one week and watch the news on tv . Write down every positive story for Trump and every negative. See what the % is

2 read. “ rules for radicals “ written by Saul Alynski . It’s very enlightening .

The others failed to do these things as their comments blatantly tell me . Let’s see if you can take the step to educate yourself

 

[skinsdad62]

FACT CHECK: Did the Obama Administration Select the Countries Affected by President Trump's Immigration Order?


What's False
The 2015 bill was attached as a rider to a "must pass" omnibus spending bill and did not create an outright ban on entry into the U.S. from designated countries.

The bill you claim is a “ must pass “ bill . Really isn’t . The govt can be shut down if Obama didn’t like what was in it . Fact is his administration identifies the countries and actually added 3 more . The debate came up when Trump said those countries were” most dangerous “ your. Left wing Soros funded site failed to mention that