visionary Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 7 minutes ago, tshile said: It describes their state perfectly. It also makes a clear distinction between legal immigration and illegal immigration (which dems like to lump together because it it makes it easier to beat down the character of the person you're debating/arguing with) It's only dehumanizing if you mean for it to be. But it’s not illegal immigration in many cases. It is legal immigration that then leads to their status changing for one reason or another. So to lump them all together is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 minute ago, visionary said: But it’s not illegal immigration in many cases. It is legal immigration that then leads to their status changing for one reason or another. DACA/DAPA is not for those that immigrated legally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 23 minutes ago, PeterMP said: @tshile this my point. The Republicans are asking for perfection (which cannot be achieved without huge expenses that are well beyond anything they are actually proposing to fix the problem) before moving on immigration reform republicans are currently a worthless bucket of scum. i'm not particularly interested in what they want, because their motives are nefarious and in general they are lying for one reason or another (often related to white nationalist, sexist, xenophobic, whatever else stuff) i am interested in talking about the dems ideas because, for one I actually agree with them for the most part, and two they're actually interested in governing over the issue (well, for the most part, kind of; it's at least no where near as bad as whatever the hell the gop is doing) i also noticed you didn't answer a single question twa posed. not that you have to, but there was an obvious point there and you just glossed right over it and straight to - well guess that means drones and sensors don't work, hur hur hur. 2 minutes ago, visionary said: But it’s not illegal immigration in many cases. It is legal immigration that then leads to their status changing for one reason or another. you mean their status being changed to being here illegally? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 6 minutes ago, twa said: Then Dems shouldn't tie it to a govt shutdown.....as I mentioned earlier Right. That tactic is reserved for forcing the majority party to repeal legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 Just now, Larry said: Right. That tactic is reserved for forcing the majority party to repeal legislation. Which should be a part of this thread then right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 25 minutes ago, tshile said: you mean their status being changed to being here illegally? One possible outcome I suppose. Or that they come here on a work visa or something like that and that runs out, etc. And it might be their status changes due to some technical issue on the other end, or a sudden shift in politics, or a change in government or department policy. They did not necessarily immigrate illegally though, is my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 1 hour ago, tshile said: republicans are currently a worthless bucket of scum. i'm not particularly interested in what they want, because their motives are nefarious and in general they are lying for one reason or another (often related to white nationalist, sexist, xenophobic, whatever else stuff) i am interested in talking about the dems ideas because, for one I actually agree with them for the most part, and two they're actually interested in governing over the issue (well, for the most part, kind of; it's at least no where near as bad as whatever the hell the gop is doing) i also noticed you didn't answer a single question twa posed. not that you have to, but there was an obvious point there and you just glossed right over it and straight to - well guess that means drones and sensors don't work, hur hur hur. I can't tell him any of those things (and I assumed everybody knew that) and that's his point. They weren't questions that twa was expecting an answer to because nobody knows the answer. At best, I can provide rough estimates, he knows that, and I assumed everybody else knew that and understood that was his point. If twa really wanted the answers to those questions, he could look them up as easily as I could have. I don't have any special insight into the illegal immigration numbers, but they were not honest request for information. And it is never going to be possible to answer those questions. Even if nobody crosses the border illegally in a year, it is not going to be possible to say that the number was 0. That's the nature of people doing things illegally. You don't know that they are doing it. 2 hours ago, twa said: My previous post was on supplemental wall security....as you know I'm rather well aware of the assets we have in use since my state has to fund much of it. add Make some real effort towards limiting employment and services for illegals...I've been waiting for a longtime does the fence around the WH stop folk?.......why have it? Okay, but my point still stands. We'll put up more sensors, get more drones, more rapid deployment teams (things that are continual costs) and in 5 years there will still be illegal immigration, there will be illegal immigrant here, and we won't really know how many came over the border and how many are here. The two situations are not comparable. A small number of people want to enter the White House illegally, they aren't motivated by economics, and nobody is saying the White House has to be "secure" before passing other legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 4 hours ago, The Evil Genius said: My hope if the next year is that we at ES can all stop using the terms "illegals" I would like to assist you in your endeavor. I say from now on we refer to them by a more accurate term like "criminals". After all they have broken a law by being here. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LadySkinsFan Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 How about calling the executives of companies that hire illegals criminals too? They're breaking the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreatBuzz Posted January 25, 2018 Share Posted January 25, 2018 2 hours ago, LadySkinsFan said: How about calling the executives of companies that hire illegals criminals too? They're breaking the law. We can't call them both criminals. How will we know if we are referring to the immigrant or CEO? How about "criminal immigrants" and "criminal CEO"? I'm good with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted January 26, 2018 Share Posted January 26, 2018 Crimigrants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted February 8, 2018 Author Share Posted February 8, 2018 Welp, looks like that drama is done with for the rest of this year and into September 2019. The House GOP will complain, but compromise like this is what is needed to keep the government going. Fiscal conservatism once again exposed as a fraud... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 So, ESers, do you vote for this deal? I mean, there was a deal. Dems vote not to shut down the government in exchange for the R's promising to have a vote on "DACA, and probably some other things". Dems lived up to their end of the deal. R's haven't. Vote for this thing, and you pretty much guarantee that DACA does not get voted on, this congress. But. It's a budget. And from the little I've heard, a rather bipartisan one. Looks like it's a choice between 1) Vote for it, and you've lost any leverage to get a DACA vote. 2) Or, vote against a rather bipartisan, full year budget, to attempt to force a vote on DACA (which may or may not pass, or get signed.) I'm thinking I vote for it. It at least sounds like an all right budget. And I'm not a big fan of hostage taking as a legislative tool, anyway. (I think it's kind of like the filibuster - there may be times where it's needed, but it's used way too often, and this isn't one of those times.) Heck, it's possible that this might be one of those rare times where our Congress passes something where neither party votes unanimously. Wouldn't that be refreshing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 I’m inclined to support it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 Looks like the freedom caucus is opposed so you will need quite a few Dem votes. add I vote no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renegade7 Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 9 minutes ago, Larry said: So, ESers, do you vote for this deal? Yes, because we shouldn't be using closing the government or refusing to raise the debt ceiling as a ploy for political victories. McConnell said there'd be a vote on immigration reform, but that's not the only thing going on with this government right now. This bill won't pass if immigration reform has to be agreed to as well. I'm more concerned about the increase of spending by $500 Billion over just the next two years and none of it has to do with infrastructure. That's insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hersh Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 It’s amazing how much ****ing time and energy got wasted by these POS members of the GOP with there fake *** budget fights with Obama. These idiots are the most fiscally illiterate morons to run the country during my life. “Hey, now that the economy is doing well, let’s give a giant tax cut and run up spending.” Actually it’s more like “Hey, now that we have a Republican in the White House, debt and deficits don’t matter. But remember, if a Democrat ever wins again, we can stop them from doing anything by being total hypocrites again.” It’s really indefensible and it has harmed our country. 12 minutes ago, twa said: Looks like the freedom caucus is opposed so you will need quite a few Dem votes. add I vote no. A bunch of fake *** losers in the freedom caucus that don’t know a damn thing about fiscal responsibility. 12 minutes ago, twa said: Looks like the freedom caucus is opposed so you will need quite a few Dem votes. add I vote no. A bunch of fake *** losers in the freedom caucus that don’t know a damn thing about fiscal responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogofWar1 Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 Inclined to support it because debt showdowns over political issues were unsavory when the GOP did it and it remains unsavory now. However, indeed, the GOP going back on their promises is problematic and all you can really do is file it away for later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 I feel very comfortable in a position at direct opposition to the Freedom Caucus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 16 minutes ago, Hersh said: A bunch of fake *** losers in the freedom caucus that don’t know a damn thing about fiscal responsibility. Yeah, I strongly suspect that every single one of them voted to double the federal deficit, a few weeks ago. (And voted to increase military spending, this week). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Evil Genius Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 I'm conflicted. The weasel Paul Ryan supports it and will get credit for it even if he's a toadfaced pig ****er. And he will likely stonewall Dreamers legislation. But this might be the best option the Dems have in 2 years to get some of their wants. Feels ****ty to do so, but I think the Dems have to vote yea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 37 minutes ago, Larry said: Yeah, I strongly suspect that every single one of them voted to double the federal deficit, a few weeks ago. (And voted to increase military spending, this week). On the contrary, they voted for Freedom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
visionary Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 The Freedom Caucus is just ****ing adorable. They think Republican voters are fiscal conservatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 8, 2018 Share Posted February 8, 2018 4 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said: The Freedom Caucus is just ****ing adorable. They think Republican voters are fiscal conservatives. If they thought that then they probably wouldn't have a caucus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.