Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Best Trump achievements IYO


Knob Oddy
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am all for a wall on the southern border.   It would not stop illegal activity, but it would minimize it.   

I would add cameras every so often so that it could be monitored.  

i would also move some military basic training near the wall to patrol.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, acidhead said:

Just curious.... 

In your opinion, if you were President,  what would be your policies regarding the southern border?

I'd change the asylum laws from having to be on US territory to claim to having to claim at an embassy.

I would penalize companies that employ illegals to the point that they would go out of buisness for employing them.

I would make H-2 visas into immigration visas- anyone that is good enough to work here is good enough to live here. Foreign labor is not something to subsidize your business endlessly with. 

Basically, I would take away all the profit in being here illegally or employing illegals.

They will stop being "illegal" if we make it easier and better for them to be here "legally".

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump did so much for this country but I guess to be his best achievements, it would have to be something that hasn’t been destroyed (yet) by the current Administration.

 

Created a robust and prosperous economy – destroyed, but we know we can do it again.

Energy Independence – destroyed.

Secure border – destroyed.

World peace – on the way to be destroyed.

 

What’s left is the Supreme Court returning rights to where they properly belong and unveiling/thwarting the corruption of the Deep State/Great Reset (Malthusian theory).  Giving this country time to regroup.  And minorities are stepping up.  The beggar-in-chief will have united this nation alright, against him and the Green New Deal.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

I'd change the asylum laws from having to be on US territory to claim to having to claim at an embassy.

I would penalize companies that employ illegals to the point that they would go out of buisness for employing them.

I would make H-2 visas into immigration visas- anyone that is good enough to work here is good enough to live here. Foreign labor is not something to subsidize your business endlessly with. 

Basically, I would take away all the profit in being here illegally or employing illegals.

They will stop being "illegal" if we make it easier and better for them to be here "legally".

I think the quickest way to minimize illegal immigrants is to penalize those who hire them.   There are still a lot who bring them over, use them then call immigration and walk away with no penalty, and that should be more illegal than the people who are desparate enough to take those jobs.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Myles said:

I am all for a wall on the southern border.   It would not stop illegal activity, but it would minimize it.   

I would add cameras every so often so that it could be monitored.  

i would also move some military basic training near the wall to patrol.

No wall can stop all illegal activity but a proper wall can reduce it to a trickle.  Control it.  And a wall by itself is no obstacle.  It needs hi-tech as well as low-tech aspects.  Doesn’t need to be contiguous but use the terrain to funnel traffic into control points.  Beef up ports of entries.  And have it all manned.  Turn Selective Service into a two-year obligation Peace Corps to maintain the manpower requirement.  That’s 3 million recruits every year.  With that, you can spread out the force into a rotation for other things besides border patrol.  Search & rescue, disaster recovery, agricultural, forest management, construction, first aid, rifle qual, college prep, etc.  Work in nursing homes and neighborhood renewal and revitalization.  Just whatever is needed.  And above all, we need the political will to assure its functionality.  Ultimately, this will instill patriotism and build the family and provide for better awareness of the Body Politic.  All the things the Left hates.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

You don't know who comes across what borders.  The way you declared it meant literally all borders, you didn't say a specific border.    And I don't think you know what countries have border walls, where and why.    You believe the spewing of conservatives who want to pay their buddies to build useless walls and pretend like it is for the protection of the citizens.  Maybe you need to go down and visit the southern border.

The various Executive Branch policies are there for everyone to read. The best data from Border Patrol is there to read. Studies done over twenty years ago show fencing directs people to where there's no fence. A Wall is just a step up for those willing to face the fence.

A fence has many weaknesses... you can ram it with a vehicle. Toss stuff on top of it and go over. Dig a shallow hole and go under it. Trumps wall simply addresses those issues, while still doing what the fence was designed for... deter people so they go to the official crossing points.

As Doug pointed out, very little of the open border got a wall, most was built over existing fencing, and was paid for under Obama. 

If fences/walls don't work, why did President Obama double down on fences and get it approved by the Democrat Congress?

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2010/08/13/president-obama-signs-southwest-border-security-bill

This was in 2010...

And look who was Senate President for this Border Act...

Why it was Joe Biden. Loved fences and walls then apparently. 

Screenshot_20220719-174053_Chrome.thumb.jpg.2886c586970ce28e1edbb33304d8d10b.jpg

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress

Only 12 years ago EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT lined up to sign off on fencing the border. 

Till Trump. Then magically, or hypocritically?, they hated fences, apparently.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Myles said:

I am all for a wall on the southern border.   It would not stop illegal activity, but it would minimize it.   

I would add cameras every so often so that it could be monitored.  

i would also move some military basic training near the wall to patrol.

I believe cameras is a part of the Trump wall sections. Which is why the coyotes only have time to slap up a shoddy ladder, send a few young men over the top, and run away. Also no time to cut a hole, or dig under. The Border Patrol is watching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2021 at 6:17 AM, Knob Oddy said:

Admittedly, this is funny. But could you give some explanation of why this is his greatest achievement? Greater than facilitating the signing of the peace deal preventing any further annexing of Palestinian land by Israel? 

 

 

Yes that’s very easily done my monsterous looking friend!:yes:

This meme sets it all vert clearly!:tu:

029D6B13-3D72-44C6-854E-5CDA2E7D3B07.jpeg.a35508f22cde01f7db525c3ff7f5109d.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did he really spend $1.5 billion dollars on a fake sun tans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

covfefe

"covfefe" is the answer to all the Trump questions. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, DieChecker said:

The various Executive Branch policies are there for everyone to read. The best data from Border Patrol is there to read. Studies done over twenty years ago show fencing directs people to where there's no fence. A Wall is just a step up for those willing to face the fence.

A fence has many weaknesses... you can ram it with a vehicle. Toss stuff on top of it and go over. Dig a shallow hole and go under it. Trumps wall simply addresses those issues, while still doing what the fence was designed for... deter people so they go to the official crossing points.

As Doug pointed out, very little of the open border got a wall, most was built over existing fencing, and was paid for under Obama. 

If fences/walls don't work, why did President Obama double down on fences and get it approved by the Democrat Congress?

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2010/08/13/president-obama-signs-southwest-border-security-bill

This was in 2010...

And look who was Senate President for this Border Act...

Why it was Joe Biden. Loved fences and walls then apparently. 

Screenshot_20220719-174053_Chrome.thumb.jpg.2886c586970ce28e1edbb33304d8d10b.jpg

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress

Only 12 years ago EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT lined up to sign off on fencing the border. 

Till Trump. Then magically, or hypocritically?, they hated fences, apparently.

What are you really afraid of?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

What are you really afraid of?

I want a secure border. Almost all other "industrialized", nations have very strict border control. Oh, in the EU there's easy cross nation travel, but at the borders they still check everyone.

Just try going to Australia, Japan, or New Zealand, without extensive advance paperwork. 

What are you really trying to defend?

I'd say how I've been friends and coworkers with illegals, but that doesn't mean anything online anymore. The immigrants I've known from Mexico have been much harder working, with a much better work ethic, then most of our entitled lazy locally born employees. At least on average.

Edit: Oh! And I'd like to see an end to hysterical hypocratic actions by both political parties. As a member of the Federal House of Representatives, If a law is good, and supported by your constituents, you should vote for it. Everyone not voting for this, or that, because Pelosi says so, is total BS.

Edited by DieChecker
  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

I want a secure border. Almost all other "industrialized", nations have very strict border control. Oh, in the EU there's easy cross nation travel, but at the borders they still check everyone.

Just try going to Australia, Japan, or New Zealand, without extensive advance paperwork. 

What are you really trying to defend?

I'd say how I've been friends and coworkers with illegals, but that doesn't mean anything online anymore. The immigrants I've known from Mexico have been much harder working, with a much better work ethic, then most of our entitled lazy locally born employees. At least on average.

Edit: Oh! And I'd like to see an end to hysterical hypocratic actions by both political parties. As a member of the Federal House of Representatives, If a law is good, and supported by your constituents, you should vote for it. Everyone not voting for this, or that, because Pelosi says so, is total BS.

I have seen the southern border in several states and it is idiotic to think we can build a wall across that border.   Part of the border is a river and there are laws about how close you can build near a river, which means building a wall takes private property away from their owners (it happened in Texas because a politician had an 8 mile long wall built and his buddies were the contractors that were paid to build it).   

I am trying to defend common sense.

I agree, I want hysterical hypocritical actions by both political parties to end.  I would like to see those two parties put in their rightful place and removed from the control of our elections as well as how our representatives vote.  They are supposed to represent us, but instead they represent who ever owns the party leaders.   Pelosi should have retired 10 years ago, we need term limits.  Too many bad things have happened because of people like Pelosi, Montoya, McConnel and any other crusty skeletor that is still in office after 20+ years (some 30+).

Edited by Desertrat56
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, DieChecker said:

The various Executive Branch policies are there for everyone to read. The best data from Border Patrol is there to read. Studies done over twenty years ago show fencing directs people to where there's no fence. A Wall is just a step up for those willing to face the fence.

A fence has many weaknesses... you can ram it with a vehicle. Toss stuff on top of it and go over. Dig a shallow hole and go under it. Trumps wall simply addresses those issues, while still doing what the fence was designed for... deter people so they go to the official crossing points.

As Doug pointed out, very little of the open border got a wall, most was built over existing fencing, and was paid for under Obama. 

If fences/walls don't work, why did President Obama double down on fences and get it approved by the Democrat Congress?

https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2010/08/13/president-obama-signs-southwest-border-security-bill

This was in 2010...

And look who was Senate President for this Border Act...

Why it was Joe Biden. Loved fences and walls then apparently. 

Screenshot_20220719-174053_Chrome.thumb.jpg.2886c586970ce28e1edbb33304d8d10b.jpg

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress

Only 12 years ago EVERY SINGLE DEMOCRAT lined up to sign off on fencing the border. 

Till Trump. Then magically, or hypocritically?, they hated fences, apparently.

See that is another thing that puzzles me.  Obama built more walls than Trump, arrested more people at the border,, Democrats all supported it, etc. but you list border security as a Trump achievement. 

Everything he did from putting babies in cages to building walls to stopping and arresting immigrants Democrats have done better.  Yet- everything is soo terrible right after him and one of poor-medicore Trump's greatest achievements is his wall building?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

I want a secure border. Almost all other "industrialized", nations have very strict border control. Oh, in the EU there's easy cross nation travel, but at the borders they still check everyone.

Just try going to Australia, Japan, or New Zealand, without extensive advance paperwork. 

What are you really trying to defend?

I'd say how I've been friends and coworkers with illegals, but that doesn't mean anything online anymore. The immigrants I've known from Mexico have been much harder working, with a much better work ethic, then most of our entitled lazy locally born employees. At least on average.

Edit: Oh! And I'd like to see an end to hysterical hypocratic actions by both political parties. As a member of the Federal House of Representatives, If a law is good, and supported by your constituents, you should vote for it. Everyone not voting for this, or that, because Pelosi says so, is total BS.

Deoending, on where you are from, you need an ESTA to visit the USA.

https://www.traveller.com.au/warning-over-housesitting-after-australian-denied-entry-at-us-border-deported-h253ih

When I've been to NZ I got a visa on arrival.

Edited by Golden Duck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

I have seen the southern border in several states and it is idiotic to think we can build a wall across that border.   Part of the border is a river and there are laws about how close you can build near a river, which means building a wall takes private property away from their owners (it happened in Texas because a politician had an 8 mile long wall built and his buddies were the contractors that were paid to build it).   

I am trying to defend common sense.

I agree, I want hysterical hypocritical actions by both political parties to end.  I would like to see those two parties put in their rightful place and removed from the control of our elections as well as how our representatives vote.  They are supposed to represent us, but instead they represent who ever owns the party leaders.   Pelosi should have retired 10 years ago, we need term limits.  Too many bad things have happened because of people like Pelosi, Montoya, McConnel and any other crusty skeletor that is still in office after 20+ years (some 30+).

I view his ideas of building a wall like the people along the river builds levees.  It may appear to stop towns along the river from flooding, but the flow isn't reduced.  It either just goes right over the top of the levee or all pours through the weakest point.  In fact the levees don't work at all if there isn't someplace for the flow to go.  Heck alot of places along the river just try to build extra high so the next town down the river floods.

The same with immigration.  To stop the flood, we need to do something to reduce the flow- be it by taking action at the source or by giving the flow someplace where it can (legally and safely) go.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The desert alone will protect a sizable portion of the border.

During the California gold rush, hundreds of Mexicans tried to walk the Devils Highway that parallels the border for hundred of miles.  Hundreds of them died of thirst, some within feet of the only spring in scores of miles.  This part of the border does not need a wall.

The border cuts through several old land grants that are still owned by private families.  Building a wall through the middle of the ranch will make it unworkable.  These families will probably be able to demand land of equal productivity on whichever side of the border best fits their operations.  The US govt has lots of BLM land along the border it could trade for these ranches, but what if the ranch's main operations are on the Mexican side?  Then uncle gets to buy part of Mexico to compensate the owners.

Most of the "flood" are Mexicans who work in the US for awhile, then go back to Mexico - some of them on a daily basis.  They inflate the immigration numbers without causing any permanent change in population.  And there are some refugees from war and violence in places like Honduras that want to become residents, at least until things settle down in Honduras.  Most of them will go home eventually, even if that isn't for several years.

In short, the immigration "crisis" is badly inflated.

Doug

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Desertrat56 said:

What are you really afraid of?

Do you understand the dangers of an open uncontrolled border where mass migration swamps the local support systems?  Such migrations only encourage crime, disease, and poverty to come rushing in.  That strains and drains the resources.  Enemies of America slip in, no intention of assimilation of the rest.  Opening the gates for the pariahs to loot and pillage (fall of Rome).  These people have no sense of this nation, her history, the Constitution, the Founders, our heritage, or even what Rights are, let alone what true liberty and freedom is.  Maybe this wouldn’t happen if more of the indigenous understood those things.  All they think it is, is just getting free stuff.  They’ve never known these things from where they’ve come from.  You just don’t start living in liberty when you get here.  It’s like feeding someone who is starving all the food they can eat.  It will kill them.  Assimilation is a slow process to bring immigrants up to speed.  Without this process, you end up with lingering ethnic enclaves throughout cities (instead of having neighborhoods change over just a few generations).

 

Then throw in the other anti-American policies of this Administration.  We are in a recession and it will only get worse with hyperinflation, rising prices, shortages of essentials, rolling power blackouts, no law and order, etc.  And it’s all self-inflicted and it will result in unnecessary death.  The Left must always manufacture a crisis to stay in power.  Seriously, what do you think will happen?  And we shouldn’t be afraid?

 

Let’s say that there is no issue with the initial logistics and everyone on the planet, migrates to America tomorrow.  Would America still be America?  Or would it be some cross of Indian/Chinese?  And for sure the current leadership wouldn’t be tolerated (they would be out of power and fast).  How long before the groceries run out and they leave to go back to where they came from?  We would be disposed of like an emptied can.  All it takes are a few hundred thousand for the country to be affected.  A nation can only be a nation if it has a common language, a common culture, and borders.  Without those, then we have no nation.  Legal immigration is our life blood but without controls, assimilation, and limits, there would be nothing.  It’s the dynamics of nation building and the Left have no clue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Doug1066 said:

The desert alone will protect a sizable portion of the border.

Did you think the concept was to have a contiguous wall?  Not even the Great Wall of China was contiguous.  It had overlapping sections and openings in the wall.  And in those sections is where they posted their armies.  They didn’t just build the wall and walk away.  The wall fell when it wasn’t manned.  For here, the desert alone is not enough.  We need to be strategic in what is used.  Wall sections, fences, terrain (including desert), ditches and berms.  All working together to funnel traffic to places of our choosing.  All laced with surveillance technology, whether they are sensors, cameras, drones, etc.  Polka-dot the line from outposts to forts.  The next layer would be boots to man sections and regions.  Either foot, mounted, mechanized, air, or boat.  Whatever makes sense.  The real wall will be the political will.

 

Quote

During the California gold rush, hundreds of Mexicans tried to walk the Devils Highway that parallels the border for hundred of miles.  Hundreds of them died of thirst, some within feet of the only spring in scores of miles.  This part of the border does not need a wall.

If it was just them, then it would be effective.  But you have those that store caches along migration routes (which many are no more than goat trails) on both sides of the border and maintain them, or periodically move them.  One time we ran into such a cache in California and we knew they were near (we surprised them), but we didn’t push the issue and moved on.  We took a couple of bottles of water and left.

 

Quote

The border cuts through several old land grants that are still owned by private families.  Building a wall through the middle of the ranch will make it unworkable.  These families will probably be able to demand land of equal productivity on whichever side of the border best fits their operations.  The US govt has lots of BLM land along the border it could trade for these ranches, but what if the ranch's main operations are on the Mexican side?  Then uncle gets to buy part of Mexico to compensate the owners.

That is a problem that needs to be figured out.  A trade would be one possibility.  I’d run a fence around the land grant and leave the land grant intact in Mexico.  Maybe have the land grant owner build their own wall around their property?  There are probably not a lot of these anyway.

 

Quote

Most of the "flood" are Mexicans who work in the US for awhile, then go back to Mexico - some of them on a daily basis.  They inflate the immigration numbers without causing any permanent change in population.  And there are some refugees from war and violence in places like Honduras that want to become residents, at least until things settle down in Honduras.  Most of them will go home eventually, even if that isn't for several years.

The “flood” is from the Northern Triangle.  Why do you think the clown-in-training went down there?  Those day workers aren’t putting a strain on resources as those coming in caravans and staying do.  There are tens of thousands from every county in the world coming across.  And we have no idea who they are.  Don’t you think that should be some of the most important information we have?  Many are desirable and should stay but many are not desirable and should be deported.  Cities and states should be sanctuaries for American citizens (wow, what a concept).  If we stop feeding them, they’d leave sooner.  Those that stay will be the productive ones capable of feeding themselves.  Those are the immigrants that the Founding Fathers wanted.

 

Quote

In short, the immigration "crisis" is badly inflated.

You haven’t talked to or listened to someone that either works at the border or lives there.  Both will tell you otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Did you think the concept was to have a contiguous wall?

The concept was to have a way to exploit immigrants without having to inconvenience those who make money off them.  If we want to stop illegal border crossings, all we have to do is arrest, try and convict those who aide and abet them by employing them.  Then the crossings will stop without the trouble, environmental damage and expense of building a wall.  There is, of course, a down side:  if they can't get laborers, produce farmers won't be able to harvest their crops without paying a decent wage.  That will make tomatoes, lettuce, broccoli and many other crops extremely expensive.  So who benefits from the current system?  You do; I do; everyone who likes a salad for dinner or sauce on his spaghetti; everyone who eats potatoes and everyone who gets his lawn mowed for almost nothing.  The wall is all a big show to make the ignorant think something is being done.

20 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

But you have those that store caches along migration routes (which many are no more than goat trails) on both sides of the border and maintain them, or periodically move them.

If you don't think the government has a license to kill people who are only trying to make a living, then you have to do something about it.  Putting out water for immigrants is a good way to do it without having to shoot anybody.  Border patrol agents three or four years back destroyed a well on private land, rather than let immigrants get a drink.  The owner sued - they had destroyed his cattle-watering station.  THAT is government over-reach.  Taking govt cameras taht have been placed illegally is another less-violent way to stop the killing.

27 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

Those that stay will be the productive ones capable of feeding themselves.

When my great-grandparents came over from Finland on a ship named the Imperator, they didn't have jobs.  They had no one to take care of them and the government had to feed them.  But they found jobs and became productive citizens, just as these immigrants will.

29 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

You haven’t talked to or listened to someone that either works at the border or lives there.  Both will tell you otherwise.

Would knowing and talking to a coyote be enough of an acquaintanceship to satisfy you?

Doug

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doug1066 said:

The concept was to have a way to exploit immigrants without having to inconvenience those who make money off them. 

I don’t think so.  I’m pretty sure it had something to do to secure the southern border.

 

Quote

If we want to stop illegal border crossings, all we have to do is arrest, try and convict those who aide and abet them by employing them. 

I totally agree and that goes all the way up to the President.  As Trump did, the President needs to state that the border is closed and follow it up with stern action and not ignore it with a wink of an eye.  But that isn’t going to stop illegals coming across.  There are still the drugs and criminals that come here to hide.  And until our policy is established, there will be those that will challenge the current Administration.  And whenever we get a week Administration, they will continue to probe that weakness.

 

Quote

Then the crossings will stop without the trouble, environmental damage and expense of building a wall. 

The crossings won’t stop and the minute we ease up, is when the wrong ones come across.  I don’t seem to recall any serious damage caused to the environment at the Great Wall of China.  If the planning is done right for our wall, it won’t cause any damage either.

 

Quote

There is, of course, a down side:  if they can't get laborers, produce farmers won't be able to harvest their crops without paying a decent wage.  That will make tomatoes, lettuce, broccoli and many other crops extremely expensive. 

Well, I think they need to start paying a decent wage.  There are plenty of Americans that will be willing to work for a decent wage.  Even one that is not, they just want to work.  The presence of illegals hurt our poor.  That’s why I incorporated what I want to do with Selective Service.  One can spend some of their time bringing in a crop for one season (giving people experiences).  You’re worried about how expensive produce would become?  What about now, with the Green New Deal/2030 Agenda raging war on the economy?  Prices will (and are) shoot up far more than what a decent wage would bring.  A free market will regulate that but a government policy will artificially raise food prices until people begin to starve.  I’m ok paying more for food.  We’ve made the decision to not mess with our health.  We skimp in other areas, just not food.  We usually shop for our food at Trader Joes, Whole Foods, Sprouts, Natural Grocers, etc.

 

Quote

So who benefits from the current system?  You do; I do; everyone who likes a salad for dinner or sauce on his spaghetti; everyone who eats potatoes and everyone who gets his lawn mowed for almost nothing.  The wall is all a big show to make the ignorant think something is being done.

That’s hardly a benefit.  I definitely don’t consider it one.  We need to get out of this cheap crap stuff from China and go with the market setting the price.  That is the only version of capitalism that works.

 

Quote

If you don't think the government has a license to kill people who are only trying to make a living, then you have to do something about it.  Putting out water for immigrants is a good way to do it without having to shoot anybody. 

That’s even worse.  Illegals need to understand that there will be no water.  If they know that then they will be less likely to chance a crossing.  There will always be Darwin candidates giving it a try, but it will save lives in the long run.  Illegals cannot be exploited then.

 

Quote

Border patrol agents three or four years back destroyed a well on private land, rather than let immigrants get a drink.  The owner sued - they had destroyed his cattle-watering station.  THAT is government over-reach. 

The intent was ok.  But their actions sounded desperate and given the environment, it is understandable.  That is what open borders cause.  Did the rancher get his well back or a work around?  What was the actions of the rancher?  Something like this usually takes two to tango, which sets up a bad situation.

 

Quote

Taking govt cameras taht have been placed illegally is another less-violent way to stop the killing.

Who’s taking illegal cameras and what constitutes an illegal camera on the border?

 

Quote

When my great-grandparents came over from Finland on a ship named the Imperator, they didn't have jobs.  They had no one to take care of them and the government had to feed them.  But they found jobs and became productive citizens, just as these immigrants will.

How ‘bout that! Your great-grandparents (as mine from Moravia) did it the right way.  They came here to work and be successful.  One can’t be successful being on welfare.  And crossing illegally as their first act, is not showing a desire to become a law-abiding citizen.  Doesn’t show that they want to start anew.  On two occasions, Washington spoke of the expected duty of new immigrants to this country: “if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.”  And “, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.  Illegals fall short of meeting this requirement.

 

Quote

Would knowing and talking to a coyote be enough of an acquaintanceship to satisfy you?

Nope.  I’d want to hear from those that are negatively affected, like the ranchers that live on or near the border, whose lands get trampled and wasted by illegals, like our poor that are robbed of their livelihoods, like those that are addicted to drugs like fentanyl, like the Border Patrol that gets demonized for doing their job so that you can sleep safe in your bed.  Compassion begins at home.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

I’d want to hear from those that are negatively affected,

NYC and DC are finding out what the people have been complaining about. They have only been sent a few in comparison too.

Asylum Seekers Flooding NYC Shelters, Mayor Says, Calling on Feds for Help

New York City Mayor Eric Adams on Tuesday demanded the federal government help pay for what he said was a wave of asylum seekers pouring into the city, claiming its safety net was being strained by busloads of people coming from border states and elsewhere.

Adams' comments echo those of Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, who took to national TV Sunday morning to say her city's homeless shelters were filling up because of buses being sent en masse to the city from Texas and Arizona.

But as opposed to D.C., the problem in New York City is exacerbated by its "right to shelter" mandate, which means any homeless asylum seeker who comes to town, by any means, has to be put in a bed somewhere.

"Currently, New York City is experiencing a marked increase in the number of asylum seekers who are arriving from Latin America and other regions. In some instances, families are arriving on buses sent by the Texas and Arizona governments, while in other cases, it appears that individuals are being sent by the federal government," Adams said in a statement, adding that more than 2,800 asylum seekers had entered the shelter system in recent weeks.

cont...

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/asylum-seekers-flooding-nyc-shelters-mayor-says-calling-on-feds-for-help/3780201/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have treaties saying we will accept a certain number of refugees.  When that number is reached, we should turn away additional refugees.

It's harsh, but admitting too many can damage our economy without helping theirs.  We need to help these countries end their civil strife and build their economies so people don't have to leave home.  Only then can we open the border.

Open borders are the last thing we want - but we do want them.

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Doug1066 said:

We have treaties saying we will accept a certain number of refugees.  When that number is reached, we should turn away additional refugees.

It's harsh, but admitting too many can damage our economy without helping theirs.  We need to help these countries end their civil strife and build their economies so people don't have to leave home.  Only then can we open the border.

Open borders are the last thing we want - but we do want them.

Doug

Not me.   I want a good screening and certain qualifications

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Myles said:

Not me.   I want a good screening and certain qualifications

I think it's Canada and Australia where you have to have a job waiting for you too. There may be others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.