Politics Trump's immigration reform

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
DaLincolnJones said:
Riverman..to this day citizenship is granted to those that serve in one of the armed services. I have personally known people from Mexico, Australia, Poland, and several other surrounding EU shitholes, GB, Philippines, hmm, a couple of Northern African countries...anyone that wants to earn citizenship is more than welcomed to sign up.
Click to expand...
I'm a vet and I served with many immigrants who did that, my point is that if it were a condition of legal status, it could be mandatory and dealt with at the borders as it was with Ellis Island. I don't see recruiting stations on the border of Mexico these days. We had them in New York City
 
riverman said:
I did not say only white immigrants but I did say in regards to Irish and Euro immigrants, being white was a plus...you know why we fought the Civil War I'm guessing?
Click to expand...
Don't say it was because of slavery. If you do, then you need to relearn history
 
I could become a citizen of my wife's native country but to do so, I'd have to serve 2 years in their military..not that I'd want to
 
riverman said:
I don't think his platform has any semblance of substance. Whether liberal or conservative or apathetic, his platform is a disaster in the making. We need reforms, but not at the expense of democracy.
Click to expand...

Hey man, I do respect many of your posts, but this one makes me scratch my head. How does securing the borders threaten democracy? Disaster in the making? Hmm, only if you are referring to the political infighting among the professional politicians. Finally, to say that he has no substance is stunning. He has the most comprehensive stand of anyone over the past thirty of forty years. Again, I do not agree with everything he has in this regards, but I do give him credit for taking a position.
 
magnifier661 said:
Don't say it was because of slavery. If you do, then you need to relearn history
Click to expand...
no mags, I don't...and again you're exaggerating a point just to sensationalize your logic. I don't know, maybe you think slavery wasn't a factor in the Civil War or the mass forced migration of Native Americans was a choice they had because we were so democratic here.
 
DaLincolnJones said:
Hey man, I do respect many of your posts, but this one makes me scratch my head. How does securing the borders threaten democracy? Disaster in the making? Hmm, only if you are referring to the political infighting among the professional politicians. Finally, to say that he has no substance is stunning. He has the most comprehensive stand of anyone over the past thirty of forty years. Again, I do not agree with everything he has in this regards, but I do give him credit for taking a position.
Click to expand...
I've never said we didn't need better border management. I have said that attacking hispanic refugees and assuming they are all cartel drug dealers is a shallow point of view. Calling them all Mexican is a shallow point of view. I don't believe a wall is the answer. I want the country to have the best national guard and coast guard on the planet. Trumps plan is ridiculous to me
 
Two years mandatory service sounds like Israel..Lots of other EU countries still have the same requirement..and I believe that Canada still has the same..dunno, that may have changed.
 
DaLincolnJones said:
Two years mandatory service sounds like Israel..Lots of other EU countries still have the same requirement..and I believe that Canada still has the same..dunno, that may have changed.
Click to expand...
It works if it's implemented. You must register upon entry to the country so you become documented.
 
riverman said:
no mags, I don't...and again you're exaggerating a point just to sensationalize your logic. I don't know, maybe you think slavery wasn't a factor in the Civil War or the mass forced migration of Native Americans was a choice they had because we were so democratic here.
Click to expand...
Well then what was it riverman? What point were you trying to make then? Because now you are talking about native Americans, pulling the race card
 
riverman said:
I've never said we didn't need better border management. I have said that attacking hispanic refugees and assuming they are all cartel drug dealers is a shallow point of view. Calling them all Mexican is a shallow point of view. I don't believe a wall is the answer. I want the country to have the best national guard and coast guard on the planet. Trumps plan is ridiculous to me
Click to expand...

Hey Buddy, go back to the OP..read his platform. Where his off the cuff media interviews have at time solicited poorly stated comments like the ones you refer to, in the OP there in nothing that backs up this post of yours, In fact if the political polarization is removed from the equation, these make sense. If you were told that this was a canadian, Aussie, German , Poland or Swiss platform, you would have zero problem accepting the stand.
 
riverman said:
I've never said we didn't need better border management. I have said that attacking hispanic refugees and assuming they are all cartel drug dealers is a shallow point of view. Calling them all Mexican is a shallow point of view. I don't believe a wall is the answer. I want the country to have the best national guard and coast guard on the planet. Trumps plan is ridiculous to me
Click to expand...
You keep pulling the race card. What is your point riverman???? Don't use the silly argument of racism, when the talk is about "illegals"
 
magnifier661 said:
Well then what was it riverman? What point were you trying to make then? Because now you are talking about native Americans, pulling the race card
Click to expand...
I guess you think we should ignore the aboriginals in the context of history, or the slaves...my point is easy to understand. Trump wants to instill a mass exodus of 11 million hispanics...I think the comparison is pretty clear
 
DaLincolnJones said:
Hey Buddy, go back to the OP..read his platform. Where his off the cuff media interviews have at time solicited poorly stated comments like the ones you refer to, in the OP there in nothing that backs up this post of yours, In fact if the political polarization is removed from the equation, these make sense. If you were told that this was a canadian, Aussie, German , Poland or Swiss platform, you would have zero problem accepting the stand.
Click to expand...
To put this in perspective would require trusting Trump and his spin team. Neither which I do. I don't hear Trump complaining about the Canadian border but I have the same feelings about immigration no matter which border or port is involved. I've heard Trump insult Asians and Hispanics loudly..I don't understand how anyone could get behind him even if his writers know how to compose a spreadsheet
 
riverman said:
I guess you think we should ignore the aboriginals in the context of history, or the slaves...my point is easy to understand. Trump wants to instill a mass exodus of 11 million hispanics...I think the comparison is pretty clear
Click to expand...
Okay, so you are calling trump a racist right? I mean just say it.

If someone came to this country illegally, then they broke the law. It's really that simple. It's really sad when a father goes to prison and the family is broken up, so we just let all prisoners free because it's inhuman to break up family. Do you truly understand just exactly what you are saying here?
 
riverman said:
To put this in perspective would require trusting Trump and his spin team. Neither which I do. I don't hear Trump complaining about the Canadian border but I have the same feelings about immigration no matter which border or port is involved. I've heard Trump insult Asians and Hispanics loudly..I don't understand how anyone could get behind him even if his writers know how to compose a spreadsheet
Click to expand...
They don't have a problem with illegal Canadians flooding our country. Do you know that Mexico has built a wall south of their boarder? That they ship out any illegal immigrants that flood their country? Why doesn't Mexico build a wall north? Yeah that's right, because they don't have a problem with US citizens flooding their country.
 
magnifier661 said:
Okay, so you are calling trump a racist right? I mean just say it.

If someone came to this country illegally, then they broke the law. It's really that simple. It's really sad when a father goes to prison and the family is broken up, so we just let all prisoners free because it's inhuman to break up family. Do you truly understand just exactly what you are saying here?
Click to expand...
Apparently much more than you do with this statement..let all prisoners free? You're clearly just insulting me now..I'm done with this topic...FUCK TRUMP!
 
magnifier661 said:
Okay, so you are calling trump a racist right? I mean just say it.
Click to expand...

Not him, but that is who he parrots too.

http://www.pri.org/stories/2015-08-...n-supporters-theyre-not-his-only-questionable

I liked this one, but probably not a serious republican though?

“Hopefully, he’s going to sit there and say, ‘When I become elected president, what we’re going to do is we’re going to make the border a vacation spot, it’s going to cost you $25 for a permit, and then you get $50 for every confirmed kill,’ ” Jim Sherota, 53, who works for a landscaping company, told the New York Times. “That’d be one nice thing.”
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94 said:
Exactly, yet somehow it's racist or uncaring.

I have no problem with LEGAL immigration, in fact I think it should be made easier to become a citizen legally. However, I do not support illegal immigration.
Click to expand...
Exactly the point I was trying to make. The fact that someone breaks the law and is sent to jail is human, but deport illegals to their home country is inhuman is fucking stooooooopid
 
magnifier661 said:
Don't say it was because of slavery. If you do, then you need to relearn history
Click to expand...
even though it was argued in favor of states rights it is explicet that the states' right that was of overriding importance was the property ownership of slaves. the argument further states that was the nonenforcement of those property rights by the northern states and passing laws nullifying those property rights in those northern states that was of the consequence for their succession.
article 4 of the constitution was sighted as the cause, it reads" no person held in service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from service or labor, but be delivered up on claim of property to whom such service or labor may be due" the fact that northern states enacted laws "nullifying or rendered useless any attempts to execute them'
these quotations are from the south Carolina articles of sucession , the first state to succeed . it really was all about slavery and those people as property mags
 
lawai'a said:
even though it was argued in favor of states rights it is explicet that the states' right that was of overriding importance was the property ownership of slaves. the argument further states that was the nonenforcement of those property rights by the northern states and passing laws nullifying those property rights in those northern states that was of the consequence for their succession.
article 4 of the constitution was sighted as the cause, it reads" no person held in service or labor in one state, under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from service or labor, but be delivered up on claim of property to whom such service or labor may be due" the fact that northern states enacted laws "nullifying or rendered useless any attempts to execute them'
these quotations are from the south Carolina articles of sucession , the first state to succeed . it really was all about slavery and those people as property mags
Click to expand...
But it really wasn't. The slavery issue became strong long after the civil war started. Slavery was a big issue because it villianized the South. I'm glad it became an issue though because we wouldn't be where we are today as a nation.

And throughout the historical records, the Union allowed Sotuhern citizens to treat blacks as poorly, just not as slaves.
 
magnifier661 said:
But it really wasn't. The slavery issue became strong long after the civil war started. Slavery was a big issue because it villianized the South. I'm glad it became an issue though because we wouldn't be where we are today as a nation.

And throughout the historical records, the Union allowed Sotuhern citizens to treat blacks as poorly, just not as slaves.
Click to expand...
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp read the entire article of succession. property rights to slaves was the only states right mentioned and the only reason for succession . it was slavery brah, candy coated as states right to hold people as property.
 
lawai'a said:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp read the entire article of succession. property rights to slaves was the only states right mentioned and the only reason for succession . it was slavery brah, candy coated as states right to hold people as property.
Click to expand...
During Lincoln's first term, slave trade was illegal, but slavers didn't have to free their slaves. This has been a common misconception, because I believe even Lincoln said or someone in the administration "If we could bring the union together without freeing a single slave we would"

Here is a little history on the matter.

http://www.salon.com/2012/08/29/did_northern_aggression_cause_the_civil_war/
 
It’s a familiar chronology: Under the terms of the First Confiscation Act of August 1861, disloyal masters would “forfeit” the use of their slaves, but the slaves were not actually freed. Lincoln ordered General John C. Frémont to rescind his decree of that September freeing the slaves of rebels in Missouri, and several months later the President rescinded General Hunter’s order abolishing slavery in three states. As late as the summer of 1862, we are reminded, Lincoln was writing letters to Horace Greeley saying that if he could end the war without freeing a single slave, he would do so. Even after the President finally promised an emancipation proclamation, in September 1862, several months elapsed until the proclamation actually came on 1 January 1863.
Click to expand...

As you see, it was Lincoln
 
My father immigrated to this country (legally) , enlisted in the Air Force and became a citizen. My parents met at the air force base swimming pool. Her father was career military.
 
great post Mags..funny thing, I had the same conversation with a co worker today. The states rights VS federal or central government has been an argument in this country ever sense the war for independence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top