Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

The immigration thread: American Melting Pot or Get off my Lawn


Burgold

Recommended Posts

The Attorney General is the attorney for the United States, not the President specifically.

 

Yes, they serve at the pleasure of the President, but that doesn't mean they are merely a passthrough for the President's whims.

 

To suggest that the AG is a passthrough is to justify Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre as okay.  It wasn't, and it's still not.  It also turns AGs into accessories to any crimes of the government, undoubtedly forcing them to use the Nuremberg Defense.  AGs are supposed to have at least some independent judgment in matters.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate all your responses.  I dunno, maybe because I'm a social worker I'm cynical.  I love all you sympathetic bleeding hearts but I can't do it anymore.  I am not even taking any sides, I just don't care.  Immigrants from all over the world could be welcomed with open arms, or they could be excluded.  It really doesn't matter to me.

 

*edit* I guess if I had to summarize, it would be that I am more concerned with helping the people already in this country than the ones outside of it.  There are plenty of people that could use it.  Social services are already strained significantly. 

Edited by abdcskins
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

The Attorney General is the attorney for the United States, not the President specifically.

 

Yes, they serve at the pleasure of the President, but that doesn't mean they are merely a passthrough for the President's whims.

 

To suggest that the AG is a passthrough is to justify Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre as okay.  It wasn't, and it's still not.  It also turns AGs into accessories to any crimes of the government, undoubtedly forcing them to use the Nuremberg Defense.  AGs are supposed to have at least some independent judgment in matters.

 

Some independent judgment differs from not doing their job and instructing others not to because of "doubts".

The AG does not enact laws or EO's, nor have the right to subvert them.

 

What is required of a defense attorney if they have "doubts" of their clients innocence?

Do you damn job or get out of it.....subverting the system and ignoring obligations is not a option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, abdcskins said:

I wish I could get upset at this whole immigration freeze, but I can't.  I just feel like the US can't be an asylum for everyone.  *shrug* 

If you truly do "wish you could get upset", then I would suggest starting with the difference between immigrants and refugees, then take a gander at the statistics, personal stories, the outcry of world leaders, etc.

 

Or you could look into how potentially devastating this is regarding our security and the war on terror.  

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, abdcskins said:

I wish I could get upset at this whole immigration freeze, but I can't.  I just feel like the US can't be an asylum for everyone.  *shrug* 

I'm not upset about the idea. I've avoided talking about it because it's not a popular idea here, and I don't see the point of rehashing the conversation (I've already participated in it once here.)

 

But even I, someone who's OK with halting immigration from (some of) these countries, has a real problem with the way it was done.

 

It's irresponsible and reckless to issue an order:

- Where there is no time for the relevant agencies (including those responsible for enforcing it) to actually understand the order

- In such a way where there exist people who got on a plane to the US while their coming here was allowed, and in mid-flight the rules changed and now they are not allowed. I'd go so far as to say it would be unfair for people who have scheduled (and paid for) trips in the near future as well

 

Couple the apparent piss poor construction of the order, and his administration produced chaos when it was unnecessary.
 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, abdcskins said:

I appreciate all your responses.  I dunno, maybe because I'm a social worker I'm cynical.  I love all you sympathetic bleeding hearts but I can't do it anymore.  I am not even taking any sides, I just don't care.  Immigrants from all over the world could be welcomed with open arms, or they could be excluded.  It really doesn't matter to me.

 

*edit* I guess if I had to summarize, it would be that I am more concerned with helping the people already in this country than the ones outside of it.  There are plenty of people that could use it.  Social services are already strained significantly. 

 

I was going to talk **** about social workers but whatever. I think i just need to accept my loved ones suffering because of our government being eh to some people. Rock on. And good luck getting out of bed everyday being a cynical social worker. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, tshile said:

I'm not upset about the idea. I've avoided talking about it because it's not a popular idea here, and I don't see the point of rehashing the conversation (I've already participated in it once here.)

 

But even I, someone who's OK with halting immigration from (some of) these countries, has a real problem with the way it was done.

 

It's irresponsible and reckless to issue an order:

- Where there is no time for the relevant agencies (including those responsible for enforcing it) to actually understand the order

- In such a way where there exist people who got on a plane to the US while their coming here was allowed, and in mid-flight the rules changed and now they are not allowed. I'd go so far as to say it would be unfair for people who have scheduled (and paid for) trips in the near future as well

 

Couple the apparent piss poor construction of the order, and his administration produced chaos when it was unnecessary.
 

 

That's part of my feelings.  

 

I'd said previously, for example, that if Trump had simply announced that there will be no new visas/immigrations/refugees paperwork from said countries, then as far as I know, it's perfectly within his powers.  (My opinion is subject to change if there's more information.  For example, if it comes out that Congress, not the President, sets immigration levels per country.)  

 

I think it would have been a really bad decision.  But well within his authority.  (And considerably less of a cluster****.)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, BornaSkinsFan83 said:

 

 I think i just need to accept my loved ones suffering because of our government being eh to some people.

 

Who are your loved ones?  And why are they suffering?  Honest question.  I hope they can get help.  I'm not sure exactly what the above sentence means or who you are referring to.

Edited by abdcskins
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, abdcskins said:

*edit* I guess if I had to summarize, it would be that I am more concerned with helping the people already in this country than the ones outside of it.  There are plenty of people that could use it.  Social services are already strained significantly. 

 

Yeah, I'm sure the mindset that says let's turn our back on refugees from a region that has been destabilized by a generation worth of failed policy is exactly the type of the mindset that says we need to increase our social services spending.  

 

And many people who are net contributors to the economy like doctors, engineers, and entrepreneurs were covered by this blanket ban, but hey, why let facts get in the way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are people finally figuring out that this is all about the white majority becoming less of a majority? Alt right neo-Nazi's like Bannon are invested for obvious reasons but for the establishment this is the solution to that GOP demographics problems we've been hearing about for the last decade. That's the reason for their deafening silence. 

 

For the first time in my life I'm ashamed to be a white American. Thank you Donald Trump. Thank you GOP. Never again will America be special. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, BornaSkinsFan83 said:

So are people finally figuring out that this is all about the white majority becoming less of a majority? Alt right neo-Nazi's like Bannon are invested for obvious reasons but for the establishment this is the solution to that GOP demographics problems we've been hearing about for the last decade. That's the reason for their deafening silence. 

 

For the first time in my life I'm ashamed to be a white American. Thank you Donald Trump. Thank you GOP. Never again will America be special. 

And for all the damage they are causing they can't stop the change that is happening.  I disagree on the "never again" part.  We can recover from this, but we need to keep working hard to let the world know we don't think this is ok.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I pointed this out in an earlier post...

 

 

Quote

There are many things that could be said about Trump’s travel ban, and most of them have already been said in multiple venues, including by TAC‘s own Daniel Larison. I just want to highlight again one item: nearly half of those affected by the ban come from Iran, a country that is not experiencing Islamist violence, that is not producing large numbers of refugees, and from which we have no particular reason to suspect terrorists might be planning to sneak into America.

...

But it seems to me that anyone arguing with a straight face that the ban was about protecting America from terrorists should be arguing — among other things — that Iran doesn’t belong on the list. Yet this is the only mention of Iran in David French’s defense of Trump’s order(which is probably the best defense I’ve read so far):

 

[T]he order imposes a temporary, 90-day ban on people entering the U.S. from Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen. These are countries either torn apart by jihadist violence or under the control of hostile, jihadist governments.

 

That’s it. Iran is a “hostile, jihadist government” so we should presume all Iranians are a security risk.

 

This is why I’m going to continue to assume that a primary reason for the ban in the first place was to provoke Iranian retaliation, with the ultimate goal that poisoned relations will eventually provide a pretext for war.

 

Regular readers know I was very clear in calling out the Democratic candidate’s enthusiasm for conflict with Iran. I have zero reason to trust that this administration is any less enthused, and I interpret their actions accordingly.

 

TAC - Noah Millman - Why is Iran Part of the Ban?

 

If you're not familiar with the TAC it was started by Pat Buchanan and is very anti-neo-consevative and is specifically hostile towards foreign policy hawks. If there's one thing that aligns their writers, that's probably it. @s0crates these are the conservatives you're looking for.

 

So I don't know about the pretext for war with Iran, but them being on this list is not right and something is up.

 

It could just be an attempt to screw up the nuclear deal. The problem there is our previous position only provided leverage because it had international backing. There's been lots of concern about the (lack of) ability to restore such leverage 15 years down the road when they (Iran) decide to not abide by the terms any longer. One idea is to restore it now. Not sure how that plays out if you do stuff like this to antagonize them, especially post-Brexit when the EU is a mess.

Edited by tshile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Ding Dong signed the order, I looked at my husband and said, "I wonder what Jesus would do...?"

Well, just a minute ago, Rev. Al was on Morning Joe, with a reference to Matthew 2...when the angel told Joseph in a dream to flee because Herod would destroy his son, Jesus became a refugee in the land of Egypt. 

Drop that knowledge on someone today. 

  • Like 1
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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...