Trump, America's Unpresident

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 201 - 220 of total 368 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

survival

Big Wall climber

Terrapin Station

Feb 13, 2017 - 01:47pm PT

WILL NOT BE QUESTIONED!!

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 02:56pm PT

Your "echo" chamber is the vast majority of voters. But go ahead, overreach, ignore facts and sh#t.

Okay, facts....

Clinton won the popular vote by right at 2% of voters, hardly "the vast majority."

Lots of people voted "against Trump" in the same way that lots of voters voted "against Clinton," neither of which could be said to have SUPPORTED the candidate for whom they felt forced to vote.

Finally, the radical left libs (who seem to congregate on this site) are a tiny subset of Clinton voters.

Thus, for all of the reasons above, the echo chamber is NOT "the vast majority of voters" by ANY stretch.

You know, "facts and sh#t."

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:04pm PT

Being an illegal mom of a US citizen child does not qualify anyone for a green card, never mind getting one trivially.

False.

https://www.uscis.gov/green-card/green-card-through-family

And how would you like dozens of references to immigration attorney's sites stating things like, "The US government is extremely liberal in granting green cards and even citizenship to immediate family members of US citizens or those possessing green cards. We can help you obtain your green card, usually within a couple of months."?

There are dozens and dozens of attorneys specializing in accomplishing the VERY thing I specified. Once you have an anchor baby in country, the rest follows TRIVIALLY and has been for decades.

Of the public benefits listed in the original post, none are available to illegal immigrants.

Typical lib-speak: Couch the terms to be technically true, while ignoring the vast swath of loopholes that have for decades been employed to accomplish the very thing they said "can't happen."

In this case, the taxpayers DO pay for anchor babies to be born in vast numbers. The taxpayers DO then grant green cards and even citizenship to "immediate family members" of the instant-anchor-citizen. The taxpayers DO then pay for education, healthcare, etc., etc. for many, many anchor-families. Etc.

Many DO end up becoming full-blown welfare families that the taxpayers DO pay for. So, in fact, the entire scenario I specified IS repeated by the millions over decades.

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:07pm PT

What has Trump proposed? NOTHING!

What alternative universe do you occupy?

Trump HAS proposed to invalidate the OBVIOUS misinterpretation of the 14th amendment (which was designed to accommodate native Americans) and deport these anchor families.

You don't LIKE that "solution." Whatever. But don't pretend that neither the Republicans nor Trump have even PROPOSED a solution.

Happiegrrrl2

Trad climber

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:11pm PT

[Click to View YouTube Video]

What do you think Abe is thinking when he does that eye roll?

"I feel like he just grabbed me by the pussy."

-or-

"OMG - How an=m I going to get through the entire weekend with this buffoon?"

Fat Dad

Trad climber

Los Angeles, CA

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:14pm PT

And how would you like dozens of references to immigration attorney's sites stating things like, "The US government is extremely liberal in granting green cards and even citizenship to immediate family members of US citizens or those possessing green cards. We can help you obtain your green card, usually within a couple of months."?

There are dozens and dozens of attorneys specializing in accomplishing the VERY thing I specified. Once you have an anchor baby in country, the rest follows TRIVIALLY and has been for decades.

The underlying claim is not true. Moreover, hucksters looking to rip off poorly informed, poorly educated non-English speakers should not be cited as credible evidence of what you're claiming.

Your understanding of the 14th Amendment is laughable.

Also, consider that illegals in the U.S. pay an estimated $11.5 billion a year in taxes. Far more than your boy in the White House: http://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2016/10/06/how-much-tax-do-americas-undocumented-immigrants-actually-pay-infographic

Happiegrrrl2

Trad climber

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:22pm PT

False.

I do not see where that link says mothers of children born in the US(citizens) get a Green Card. I see " and parents of U.S. citizen petitioners 21 or older" but waiting 21 years hardly seems a trivial waiting time...

Could it be that the websites you are referring to are scammer sites that take the money from hopeful people who have little understanding of the English language and laws of the country?

After noticing that small "discrepancy," I googled one query on the subject. I entered "can an undocumented immigrant get a green card by having a child born in the US." Admittedly, I only clicked through to a fee of the top pages, but at least according to this page - http://www.alllaw.com/articles/nolo/us-immigration/become-permanent-resident-through-citizen-child.html

The parents of a U.S. citizen who is at least age 21 are considered "immediate relatives," and therefore eligible for a green card, allowing them to live and work in the U.S. -- at least in theory. A stumbling block for some parents of U.S. citizens is that they are already living in the United States unlawfully, and have already done so for six months or more, which makes them inadmissible.

Other issues to consider are that the child will be required to prove that his or her household income is sufficient to support their family and their parents at 125% or more above the U.S. poverty level, and that they must truly intend to live in the U.S. -- a green card is not a travel document, and if they stay outside the U.S. too long, the immigration authorities may come to notice that that is where they truly "live," and deny reentry.

dirtbag

climber

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:46pm PT

55-40 disapproval to approval. Have fun spinning that,

dirtbag

climber

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:48pm PT

Only Breitbart reports it, but, of course, Breitbart is "fake news." LOL

It's as genuine as "Pravda." But you so smart, you know that.

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 03:55pm PT

Could it be that the websites you are referring to are scammer sites that take the money from hopeful people who have little understanding of the English language and laws of the country?

This very well could be, although they exist by the hundreds, which makes one wonder how that many attorneys (having passed the bar, etc.) are operating what amounts to scam sites.

The more likely explanation is that they know loopholes that have worked for decades, despite the literal text of the law. For example, the LAW says all kinds of things that sanctuary cities defiantly and proudly ignore.

Here's an interesting site by an author who clearly believes that "anchor families" are in insignificant, if not irrelevant, part of the "immigration problem."

http://cis.org/north/anchor-baby-mechanisms

He notes a "loophole" that has indeed been employed countless times, particularly in California:

much more important is the hidden, undocumented, and uncounted influence of the presence of a U.S.-citizen child in the household of an illegal alien; officials are less likely to deport the parent of such a child than they are to deport an alien who is otherwise similar, but childless.

He concludes: "As Jon Feere has pointed out in a recent CIS Backgrounder on birthright citizenship, 'family-sponsored immigration accounts for most of the nation's growth in immigration levels. Of the 1,130,818 immigrants who were granted legal permanent residency in 2009, a total of 747,413 (or, 66.1 percent) were family-sponsored immigrants. A change to U.S. immigration laws in the late 1950s – one that allowed for the admission of extended family members outside the nuclear family – resulted in the average annual flow increasing from 250,000 then, to over 1 million today. This number continues to rise every year because of the ever-expanding migration chains that operate independently of any economic downturns or labor needs. Although automatic and universal birthright citizenship is not the only contributor to chain migration, ending it would prevent some of this explosive growth.'"

Note what us-immigration.com says: "Nonimmigrants, who give birth to children in the U.S., believe that their children will immediately be able to sponsor them for permanent residence. But that is not true. Such nonimmigrant parents of U.S. born children will need to wait until their children turn 21 to get a chance to get green cards in the U.S. Until then, they must maintain their non-immigrant status. Falling out of status would prevent them from obtaining green cards in the U.S."

What, exactly, would "maintain their non-immigrant status" mean???

Simply this: Don't get caught and deported until your kid turns 21, at which point you CAN trivially apply for and get a green card.

So, the attorney sites we've been referencing could well be telling this very thing to their potential clients, while not being fraudulent in saying that they can get the parents green cards within months.

The point remains: Anchor babies do exactly what the phrase says, "anchor" at least the mother in the country (not genuinely subject to any risk of deportation) until the child (or another family member who happens to become legal) can get them a green card. Meanwhile, the kid is a citizen and enjoys EVERY freebie available, because the family cannot support him/her/cis/ze/whatever. Once there is any anchored family member, the subsequent green card is forthcoming.

And this sort of thing does happen hundreds of thousands of time each year, and it has been for decades.

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:00pm PT

55-40 disapproval to approval. Have fun spinning that

Easy!

The Obumbalator enjoyed those sorts of ratings for a LONG time, repeatedly, spanning multiple quarters multiple years.

HE helped the electorate become more quickly disillusioned. It took most of them over a year to FINALLY tumble to the fact that "hope and change" were not in the offing, which is how long it took his numbers to reach this very level. It happens faster for His Hairness because people want to see more faster, given their hope for change. Thanks for that, Obama.

They are all liars and cheats. We're all catching onto this fact faster.

Like Obama, Trump's rating will fluctuate over time. And, in the end, it's irrelevant. We're not a democracy. The finger-to-the-wind popularity rating has nothing to do with governance.

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:01pm PT

It's as genuine as "Pravda." But you so smart, you know that.

So, are you flatly denying Breitbart's reporting of this matter?

StahlBro

Trad climber

San Diego, CA

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:07pm PT

Trump sounded pretty drained talking with Trudeau today. I think he grossly underestimated what it takes to be POTUS. You can't run the country by tweet and poorly conceived and executed proclamation. He may resign before he is impeached.

Jon Beck

Trad climber

Oceanside

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:10pm PT

Madbolter has escaped and has replaced the impostor who was posting the marginally readable screed. WOT is back

survival

Big Wall climber

Terrapin Station

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:14pm PT

Wall Of TRUMP!!

TradEddie

Trad climber

Philadelphia, PA

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:15pm PT

Happie beat me to it, unless waiting 21 years is trivial.

I do however stand corrected that Trump proposed doing "something" about this, even if his proposal contained no practical details on how he would deal with a dilemma that is not nearly as simple as he or MB1 would pretend. Neither is it the huge problem they pretend.

Immigration is one area where I agree with Trump's basic premise, i.e. that the current state of immigration law is unacceptable, and that neither party has the political will to change the status quo because of their vested financial or demographic interests. Beyond that, we share little in terms of solutions. His wall is a joke, as is rounding up 20 million illegals, or expecting them to go back on their own.

Illegal immigration is not a problem in itself, the problem is the lack of legal immigration, the absurd prioritization policies for visas and the lack of political will to prosecute employers. Maybe soon we can add delays from "extreme vetting" to the barriers to legal immigration. The political posturing of "no amnesty" as a racist cover from the right and "path to citizenship" for future votes on the left is frustrating genuine attempts to fix what little is actually wrong.

TE

Jon Beck

Trad climber

Oceanside

Feb 13, 2017 - 04:23pm PT

Totally agree tradEddie. the answer is somewhere in the middle

Without illegal immigration we would be at negative population growth. Anyone who think that is a good thing might want to do some research on countries that have "achieved" that.

Let me give you a hint, as more and more of us go on social security tax revenues will decrease, we need fresh meat to finance social security.

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Feb 13, 2017 - 05:18pm PT

WOT is back

You call any of what I've written here a "WOT," and you're just weak. Learn to read well-crafted paragraphs with comprehension, and you'll be just fine. Otherwise, the failing is yours.