The toddler threw a piss-and-moan party on twitter to vent his rage, probably with very tiny fists flailing about madly in the air.The unanimous ruling from a three-judge panel means that citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries will continue to be able to travel to the US, despite Trump's executive order last month.
SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!
I wouldn't even say I'm generalizing from the worst of them. Kind of goes to my views on laws. They are a fundamental necessity for civilization to exist. I don't want to live in Somalia. I think most people in Somalia are good. I think a very small minority are truly evil there. So why is it such a shit hole? Because in between the good and the evil are a group of people that are going to do whatever is easiest for them to survive. And that tends to help evil.TPRJones wrote: EDIT: Honestly we're probably both right. You are generalizing from the worst of them and I'm generalizing from the best (or at least most desperate) of them. The truth probably includes both sets and averages somewhere in the middle. Also I have no respect for laws in general as anything other than a societal tool (and see many of them as either arbitrary or downright detrimental) while you see them as something more deserving of respect. I don't think we'll ever meet in the middle here.
I was never addressing a specific group of illegals, if you guys did I missed it, sorry.Plus we're talking about whether or not to throw out people that are already in the bunker.
Try doing that yourself in a police state. The reason that the dickish minority holds power over the majority is because one side has better, bigger, and more guns. Tell me how you'd kickstart the revolution in Iran without getting executed in a month. I'm having trouble remembering the last time a dictator was argued into submission and surrendered power.There are a lot of things in Mexico and other Latino countries that would improve if that wedge of people between the good and the evil would stop doing what is easy and start doing what is right.
Yes, because down there, reporting crimes means getting killed if you report the wrong kind of crime to the wrong people or attempt to put a stop to it yourself. I believe that's why there are so many fucking paramilitary and revolutionary forces in Central and South America.I guarantee that 70% of the illegals willing to ignore our laws to sneak over here are also willing to look the other way when things were happening in their neighborhood in their home country that made them such shit holes.
I think we also need to be clear about what we mean by amnesty. For some the amnesty is not to give citizenship, but rather to lift the rule for those individuals that being caught in the country illegally prohibits you from ever becoming a citizen or entering the country again legally. And I'm okay with allowing those here illegally to have a 6 to 12 month grace period after getting things somewhat streamlined with the immigration process, and allowing them to get in line at that point for work visas and green cards, etc without penalty. But if you're caught in the country after that grace period, you are forever barred from entry and ALL of your property here is seized.Leisher wrote:I guess I'd be fine with amnesty, but I'd want it to be on a case by case basis rather than a blanket amnesty.
Maybe I've missed it, but I don't think any of the amnesty proposals have included an offer of citizenship. Amnesty just means "if you've lived here a long time as a productive and otherwise law-abiding member of our society, we will a) stop trying to throw you out, and b) not hold it against you when you do apply for citizenship".That last one could get interesting. What if we allowed blanket immunity to all, except the criminals and unemployed (and I mean permanently unemployed and living off our taxes), but with a caveat that citizenship still has to be earned?
I have no idea about citizenship. I was assuming. If it's not there, that would move me to 100% against amnesty. Sorry, but if you're here illegally and aren't going through the process of becoming a citizen or working via your visa, then get the fuck out.TPRJones wrote:Maybe I've missed it, but I don't think any of the amnesty proposals have included an offer of citizenship. Amnesty just means "if you've lived here a long time as a productive and otherwise law-abiding member of our society, we will a) stop trying to throw you out, and b) not hold it against you when you do apply for citizenship".That last one could get interesting. What if we allowed blanket immunity to all, except the criminals and unemployed (and I mean permanently unemployed and living off our taxes), but with a caveat that citizenship still has to be earned?
Leisher wrote: We're not hosting an intergalactic kegger.
I don't know if any have. No serious one has had it. But that's where the Democrats are headed with it. Cruz proposed an amendment to the gang of eight bill that provided full amnesty but as a condition of the amnesty disallowed ever granting citizenship or the right to vote in federal elections. Democrats overwhelmingly voted that down.TPRJones wrote:Maybe I've missed it, but I don't think any of the amnesty proposals have included an offer of citizenship. Amnesty just means "if you've lived here a long time as a productive and otherwise law-abiding member of our society, we will a) stop trying to throw you out, and b) not hold it against you when you do apply for citizenship".That last one could get interesting. What if we allowed blanket immunity to all, except the criminals and unemployed (and I mean permanently unemployed and living off our taxes), but with a caveat that citizenship still has to be earned?
Wait, what? Now that just got more confusing.Leisher wrote:Sorry, but if you're here illegally and aren't going through the process of becoming a citizen or working via your visa, then get the fuck out.
First of all, you're making an assumption that isn't entirely true. Not all want to become American citizens for various reasons. Whether it's a loyalty to Mexico or a desire to not pay taxes or whatever, you can't say all want to be citizens. The majority? Probably. All? No.It's not that they wouldn't want to be citizens, it's that they just can't because they are here illegally.
I'm fine with requiring anyone granted amnesty to already know English at least well enough to fill out forms and be interviewed. I mean if they've been here 10 years or more and they are a productive member of our society they will have learned at least that much English already.Second, my point was if the amnesty was given it's with the intent that you do "this" NOW or leave. So if that means downloading your free copy of Rosetta Stone English and getting to work, then you do it. If you refuse to do the basic things to conform to our society, then we don't need you. Sorry. It's a big world and there's a whole bunch of other people, who are more than likely far more skilled, who would jump to take your place.
Fair enough."All" is almost never correct about anything. I do think "most" is likely, which is why I was comfortable with the generalization.
Sounds like we're in agreement. You can stay at the party, but stop flying the Mexican flag and learn the damn language.I'm fine with requiring anyone granted amnesty to already know English at least well enough to fill out forms and be interviewed. I mean if they've been here 10 years or more and they are a productive member of our society they will have learned at least that much English already.
On the other hand, by conflating the two, they can say you're a racist xenophobe for being against illegal immigration.Leisher wrote:
Right out of the gate this is ignorant because they're mixing immigrants with people in the country illegally. Those two things are not the same.
That is interesting. High end restaurants have higher markups and higher profit margins. You'd think they could afford to pay a little more for veggies or help. Maybe they're placating their client base?the only business that they reported doing it business-wide were high-end restaurants. WTF?
Let me correct your statement for you:On the other hand, by conflating the two, they can say you're a racist xenophobe for being against illegal immigration.
