Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

What is the Point of Open Borders?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DavidSF
    started a topic What is the Point of Open Borders?

    What is the Point of Open Borders?

    I saw this article on American Thinker that, for me, really lays it out the way it should be seen.

    Democrats heatedly deny being in favor of open borders, but their actions and even their own words say otherwise. Much the same could be said about many Republicans. Both parties want an unrestricted flood of immigrants to America, but for different reasons.

    Democrats want a permanent underclass that reliably votes Democrat. Republicans want cheap labor to keep their Chamber of Commerce donors happy. Neither party acknowledges any negative consequences of the current open borders policy, allowing far more than voters and workers to enter our country.
    agree so far? I do, but the article goes on to say,

    Gallup tells us that 147 million adults would move to the US if given the chance. That’s almost half the current US population. How many of these adults have children? If you assume one child per adult, you have just doubled this number. Don’t forget grandma and grandpa. Pretty soon we’ve more than doubled the US population.

    More people with no increase in the necessary infrastructure to support such a population increase. As a country we can’t even maintain our infrastructure with our current population. Look at the subway stations or airports in New York City. Or the bridges over Western Pennsylvania rivers. Or the potholed streets of Chicago.

    Who in Washington DC, among our elected leadership, sees a problem with unrestricted immigration? Only one man.



    There is certainly no similar sentiment from the leadership across the aisle. According to Nancy Pelosi, “Our view of the law is that it — if somebody is here without sufficient documentation, that is not reason for deportation.”

    She’s not alone. Hillary Clinton, fortunately not in power, instead only coughing in half-filled lecture halls, shares Pelosi’s views, “Of the people, the undocumented people living in our country, I do not want to see them deported.”

    Chuck Schumer joined the chorus declaring that President Trump will not get the U.S.-Mexico border wall “in any form.”

    Republicans are hardly any better. Despite control of both houses of Congress for the past two years, with a president firmly in favor of shutting the open border, Republicans could not find a way to fund a wall. Funding Planned Parenthood, despite campaign promises to the contrary, was easy for Paul Ryan to push through. And Republicans wonder why they did so poorly during the midterm elections?
    the article ends with:

    Congress has a “wall” of metal detectors, roadblocks, and armed security keeping members of Congress safe from invaders. Many of them individually have walls and fences around their homes. Yet the country and people they supposedly represent are not entitled to the same protection? Border security = national security.

    Politicians who ignore the reality of, “If you bring there here, here becomes there” are unsuited for public office. Instead we have a most unlikely politician promising to stop digging an even deeper hole. Chosen overwhelmingly by the American people to, among other things, build a wall, the ruling class, along with the media, is doing everything in its power to bring him down, even if it means subverting the rule of law to do so.
    i cannot say as how I disagree with any of it.

    what are your thoughts?

  • Captain Trips
    replied
    How many times have I pointed out the fact that Congress is populated by incompetent fools ?

    And it is.

    Funny thing is, we the people keep putting these fools into congress.

    Then we complain about America being invaded from our southern border and lawlessness in general LOL

    This is an old old problem.

    We've had no real laws on immigration and illegal immigration for more then 50 or 60 years... or maybe we do, but everyone pretends we don't ?

    I don't know, but this is the result of lawlessness.

    That's all.

    Fools don't care that their country is being invaded !!!

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Congress sits and twiddles its thumbs, playing the blame game, while every one else involved us suffering the consequences.

    Every move made by the administration to address this crisis is challenged in court by open borders advocates who don't care about the starving migrants, only in getting as many people across the border that they can.

    Once here, they can only be held for a limited period of time before the courts say they must be released. Once released, it is up to local communities to feed, house, and clothe them, putting a massive strain on local resources.

    Border towns like Yuma are doing the best they can, but since sanctuary cities won't take the migrants, there is literally no where else for them to go. A broken system simply dumps those released from detention with no thought of where they might go or how to take care of them. So it is left to cities like Yuma to bear the brunt of congressional stupidity.



    https://www.americanthinker.com/blog..._the_city.html

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    So in other words you think this would be the ideal solution right? https://www.jta.org/1933/02/02/archi...n-accomplished
    It will be of great help if you actually read the post.

    So, I'll post it again and even give you a link to it.

    That should help : )

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The truth is, if hilary were president and declared this a national emergency, that would be the end of it. It would be recognized as as national emergency, and steps would be taken quickly to build the wall, barrier, potato cheese muffin, whateveryouwanttocallit.

    But hilary isn't the president, Donald Trump is.

    This caused the media AND the people in DC to suffer from a dangerous kind of disorder. It has made them hypocritics and fools.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley; Trump's First Veto a 'Sad and Important Moment'

    ..opposing his emergency declaration, marks a "sad and important moment," because of what it represents, Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley said Friday.

    "That is a lack of understanding and belief on the part of Democrats in Congress to recognize the serious, severe crisis we face along our southern border, and to recognize the emergency that exists in this country,"

    "With so many people dying every year, people pouring into this country illegally, the drugs that are now in this country, that are killing American citizens."

    "These deaths are needless, senseless, and 100 percent preventable," said Gidley. "This president has the power to do this and that authority was granted by Congress. All he's doing is enforcing the laws written and passed by Congress. "

    There were also 12 Senate Republicans who voted against Trump's order, and Gidley said its "far from me" to try to guess why.

    "Some mention the procedural line they didn't like, and some questioned it on other grounds," said Gidley. "That vote against that measure effectively makes our country less safe. It puts American people, American people's lives, at risk."


    Comments below article;

    If members of Congress don't like the President's proposals, they can tell us what their solution is on illegal immigration... drugs being walked across the border...MS13 gangs walking across the border...disease being brought across the border...millions of illegals on welfare...catch and release, et al. Congress offers no solutions. The votes against Trump are personal and political...not principled.

    https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/ho.../15/id/907216/



    Believing Congress is going to solve this problem is the belief of fools. Congress isn't competent to solve ANYTHING.

    They have been unable to make sensible progress on this matter for more than 50 years ! .. and we should expect THEM to do it now ??

    ---------------------------------------------------------


    The link to the post I promised.

    https://www.uspoliticsonline.com/for...967#post560967


    Hope you can find and read it : )

    ... if you weren't able to read the re-post of it just above here.

    Leave a comment:


  • redrover
    replied
    Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post
    The truth is, if hilary were president and declared this a national emergency, that would be the end of it. It would be recognized as as national emergency, and steps would be taken quickly to build the wall, barrier, potato cheese muffin, whateveryouwanttocallit.

    But hilary isn't the president, Donald Trump is.

    This caused the media AND the people in DC to suffer from a dangerous kind of disorder. It has made them hypocritics and fools.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley; Trump's First Veto a 'Sad and Important Moment'

    ..opposing his emergency declaration, marks a "sad and important moment," because of what it represents, Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley said Friday.

    "That is a lack of understanding and belief on the part of Democrats in Congress to recognize the serious, severe crisis we face along our southern border, and to recognize the emergency that exists in this country,"

    "With so many people dying every year, people pouring into this country illegally, the drugs that are now in this country, that are killing American citizens."

    "These deaths are needless, senseless, and 100 percent preventable," said Gidley. "This president has the power to do this and that authority was granted by Congress. All he's doing is enforcing the laws written and passed by Congress. "

    There were also 12 Senate Republicans who voted against Trump's order, and Gidley said its "far from me" to try to guess why.

    "Some mention the procedural line they didn't like, and some questioned it on other grounds," said Gidley. "That vote against that measure effectively makes our country less safe. It puts American people, American people's lives, at risk."


    Comments below article;

    If members of Congress don't like the President's proposals, they can tell us what their solution is on illegal immigration... drugs being walked across the border...MS13 gangs walking across the border...disease being brought across the border...millions of illegals on welfare...catch and release, et al. Congress offers no solutions. The votes against Trump are personal and political...not principled.

    https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/ho.../15/id/907216/



    Believing Congress is going to solve this problem is the belief of fools. Congress isn't competent to solve ANYTHING.

    They have been unable to make sensible progress on this matter for more than 50 years ! .. and we should expect THEM to do it now ??
    So in other words you think this would be the ideal solution right? https://www.jta.org/1933/02/02/archi...n-accomplished

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    The truth is, if hilary were president and declared this a national emergency, that would be the end of it. It would be recognized as as national emergency, and steps would be taken quickly to build the wall, barrier, potato cheese muffin, whateveryouwanttocallit.

    But hilary isn't the president, Donald Trump is.

    This caused the media AND the people in DC to suffer from a dangerous kind of disorder. It has made them hypocritics and fools.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley; Trump's First Veto a 'Sad and Important Moment'

    ..opposing his emergency declaration, marks a "sad and important moment," because of what it represents, Deputy Press Secretary Hogan Gidley said Friday.

    "That is a lack of understanding and belief on the part of Democrats in Congress to recognize the serious, severe crisis we face along our southern border, and to recognize the emergency that exists in this country,"

    "With so many people dying every year, people pouring into this country illegally, the drugs that are now in this country, that are killing American citizens."

    "These deaths are needless, senseless, and 100 percent preventable," said Gidley. "This president has the power to do this and that authority was granted by Congress. All he's doing is enforcing the laws written and passed by Congress. "

    There were also 12 Senate Republicans who voted against Trump's order, and Gidley said its "far from me" to try to guess why.

    "Some mention the procedural line they didn't like, and some questioned it on other grounds," said Gidley. "That vote against that measure effectively makes our country less safe. It puts American people, American people's lives, at risk."


    Comments below article;

    If members of Congress don't like the President's proposals, they can tell us what their solution is on illegal immigration... drugs being walked across the border...MS13 gangs walking across the border...disease being brought across the border...millions of illegals on welfare...catch and release, et al. Congress offers no solutions. The votes against Trump are personal and political...not principled.

    https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/ho.../15/id/907216/



    Believing Congress is going to solve this problem is the belief of fools. Congress isn't competent to solve ANYTHING.

    They have been unable to make sensible progress on this matter for more than 50 years ! .. and we should expect THEM to do it now ??

    Leave a comment:


  • eohrnberger
    replied
    Originally posted by redrover View Post

    12 Republican senators vote against Trump's phony national emergency. Maybe there is hope for this country yet.https://www.businessinsider.com/12-g...ergency-2019-3
    Its a 'hope for the country' that the illegal immigration emergency continues?
    Its a 'hope for the country' that ever more resources have to be taken from US citizens, where they should be spent, to take care of illegal immigrants, who have no legal grounds for being in the country at all?

    Please elaborate on your statement.

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    12 Republican senators vote against Trump's phony national emergency. Maybe there is hope for this country yet.https://www.businessinsider.com/12-g...ergency-2019-3
    I read some of these mens comments at your provided link ....

    https://www.businessinsider.com/12-g...ergency-2019-3

    ....and can see they're lying to us, lying to themselves, or just ignorant.

    Probably lying. Hard to tell in some cases...

    Romney says;

    "We experienced a similar erosion of congressional authority with President Obama's unilateral immigration orders — which I strenuously opposed. In the case before us now, where Congress has enacted specific policy, to consent to an emergency declaration would be both inconsistent with my beliefs and contrary to my oath to defend the constitution."

    Yes, we DID "experience a similar erosion of congressional authority with President Obama's unilateral immigration orders.."

    Another democrat president would continue on, in exactly the same ways, NO MATTER WHETHER REPUBLICANS AVOID SUCH ACTS OR NOT !!



    R. Paul says;

    "Every single Republican I know decried President Obama's use of executive power to legislate. We were right then. But the only way to be an honest officeholder is to stand up for the same principles no matter who is in power.

    So "Every single Republican [he] know[s] decried President Obama's use of executive power to legislate."

    Annnnnnd ???

    What have the results been ??

    Only fools and imbeciles think the next democrat won't carry on in the exact same manner, NO MATTER WHETHER REPUBLICANS AVOID SUCH ACTS OR NOT !!


    Rubio says;

    "We have an emergency at our border, which is why I support the president''s use of forfeiture funds and counter-drug money to build a wall. However, I cannot support moving funds that Congress explicitly appropriated for construction and upgrades of our military bases. This would create a precedent a future president may abuse to jumpstart programs like the Green New Deal, especially given the embrace of socialism we are seeing on the political left."

    He says; "...This would create a precedent a future president may abuse to jumpstart programs like the Green New Deal, especially given the embrace of socialism we are seeing on the political left."

    Yes Marco my friend, THEY'RE GOING TO DO THAT SH&^ NO MATTER WHETHER REPUBLICANS AVOID SUCH ACTS OR NOT !!

    Mike Lee says;

    "This is not about the president. This is not about my disagreement with or disapproval of the president or his approach to border security or his approach to build a barrier along our southern border. I think all those things need to happen. But this law, Mr. President, is wrong. It's not President Trump's fault. It's Congress'. We need to change it."

    Lee is living in fantasy land. That's no surprise really. He says; "It's not President Trump's fault. It's Congress'. We need to change it."

    Mike Mike Mike, do you REALLY think the incompetents in congress are going to "
    change it." ??

    Really ??

    'Congress' would be better run by an elderly bunch of women in an assisted living facility... they would get FAR more done than the sh^ts in congress today !

    Even between playing bingo, watching their favorite soap operas and everything else they have to take care of related to their age & infirmities ! The people in congress today, are COMPLETELY INCOMPETENT AND YOU Mike, ARE PROOF OF THAT.

    All of these half-wits say they support the presidents concern on border security, then turn around and DON'T support the presidents concern on border security !

    They talk a lot about "
    the Constitutional limits of the president," as if they actually gave a crap about Constitutional limits.

    Such a farce.

    The wall will get built while these fools are busy pursuing another idiotic goose chase aimed at "Impeaching President Trump," since their stupid russia hoax collapsed LOL

    Leave a comment:


  • redrover
    replied
    Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
    A National ID, or any kind of mandatory ID, whether federal, state, or even voter, is strenuously opposed by those politicians who wish to remain in power; these politicians believe if all voting (purchasing, hiring, etc) is only for citizens, only, they will be booted out of office.

    Personally, I do not think they are far from wrong.
    12 Republican senators vote against Trump's phony national emergency. Maybe there is hope for this country yet.https://www.businessinsider.com/12-g...ergency-2019-3

    Leave a comment:


  • eohrnberger
    replied
    It's not just a wall, and it's not a wall across the entire length of the border.

    The experts at CBP, the people who have to deal with the flood of illegal immigrants on a daily basis, have determined the allocation of funding to the changes and projects that will likely achieve the best results.

    Already part of the record is that border walls in the correct places do have the effect of channeling the illegal immigration traffic to ports of entry, where resources are to present to handle them efficiently, as well as a higher chance of detecting and intercepting illicit smuggling.

    Now if the Democrats could quit providing inducements in the form of enforcement loop holes for illegals illegally entering the country, falsely claiming asylum, catch and release and the like, that would be helpful.

    If 100% eVerify compliance were to be implemented and enforced, that would also reduce the inducement and would also be helpful.

    Many illegal immigrants are coming to work. Right now there's a shortage of workers, so there's a discussion / debate to be had as to how an effective, efficient, and enforceable guest worker program might be structured.

    There's much to talk about, debate and hash out, but congress, for at least several decades now, as a whole, and the Democrat extremist left in particular as of late, are not willing to start the serious discussion and debate needed; not willing to do their job, and this is the frustration many of the electorate expressed by electing Trump in the first place.

    If the extremist left keep it up, they are going to get Trump re-elected in 2020. That's pretty obvious.

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    Nope ! There's no problem on our southern border. Sorry, nothing to see here, move along ....

    Says Nancy and her imbecile friend Chuck

    But then again

    "Illegals are even abandoning toddlers – or just carelessly leaving them behind – in their desperate surge to penetrate the border.

    “An unaccompanied 2-year-old child was also found among one of the groups,” CBP noted. “The U. S. Border Patrol is currently working with international and domestic agencies in order to locate the parent(s).”"


    This inhumane crap is happening because Americas criminal leaders - Nancy, Chuck and the rest - are allowing it !

    Who are the criminals ??

    They're in Washington D.C. !


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Sunday, March 10, 2019

    700+ illegals, including sex offenders, caught in El Paso overnight

    More than 700 more illegal immigrants – including two convicted sex offenders – were caught by United States Border Patrol agents in El Paso, Texas, overnight from Tuesday to Wednesday, and the barrage of illegals continued on to Thursday, bringing the two-day total to 1,000 migrants.

    Taking advantage of the Democratic Party’s unwillingness to grant President Donald Trump the $5 billion he needs to construct a continuous 2,000=mile wall spanning the U.S.-Mexico border from California’s Pacific Coast to Texas’ Gulf Coast, waves of immigrants – the latest ones primarily comprised of families and unaccompanied juveniles from Central American countries – continue to break into America illegally.

    Illegals are even abandoning toddlers – or just carelessly leaving them behind – in their desperate surge to penetrate the border.

    “An unaccompanied 2-year-old child was also found among one of the groups,” CBP noted. “The U. S. Border Patrol is currently working with international and domestic agencies in order to locate the parent(s).”

    Criminal aliens are reportedly continuing their attempts to use hundreds of illegal immigrants to distract and preoccupy Border Patrol agents, yet the federal authorities diligence to take care of these matters is said to be thwarting this underhanded strategy.

    “While dealing with this influx of illegal aliens, Border Patrol agents also arrested two convicted sex offenders attempting to enter illegally while the agents were preoccupied with the large groups,” the CBP release informed. “Both sex offenders were arrested in different groups attempting to enter the United States illegally evading Border Patrol agents. Both subjects had been convicted of their sex offenses and had served time in jail before being deported from the United States.”

    The criminals being apprehended are not just one-time offenders, but dangerous repeat offenders being pursued by federal authorities.

    “Agents in far-east El Paso County also arrested a group of six, in which a subject – a 28-year-old U.S. citizen, self-proclaimed prison gang member – was found to have an outstanding federal warrant for escape, [and] in addition, the subject has a lengthy criminal record,” the CBP report added. “The subject was remanded to the custody to the U.S. Marshals Service, [and] the other five aliens are currently being processed accordingly.”

    Federal authorities call the flood of immigrants merely a diversion to continue their illegal dealings undetected.


    "They're using these individuals to try to coordinate movements and try to get our agents to create gaps in the coverage, and that way, they can try to exploit those gaps for the criminal aliens," CBP Spokesman Joe Romero told the local news outlet, KTSM. "We're talking about the felons – the wanted individuals, the pedophiles, the rapists, the murderers. They are trying to smuggle them past our agents by inundating them with groups like this."

    He indicated that drug traffickers across the border are controlling the timing and placement of the migrant movements attempting to break into the U.S. from Mexico.

    .
    ..........

    https://onenewsnow.com/national-secu...paso-overnight

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    The ONLY point of open borders is democrat/republican - POLITICIANS - wish for more power.

    Their greed and hunger for power.

    Illegal "migrants" will vote for more free stuff.

    Which the new criminal class, AKA "politicians," provide them while accumulating more power to themselves over the people of America.

    It's about destroying our democratic republic and "transforming" it into a socialist organization powered by a few rich elites.

    ...
    as they accuse others of being "greedy" ... sneaky sneaky these crime bosses are.

    Worth watching....

    "The divide, in this country is between decent people who stand up for America and between dastardly people who want to bring America to it's knees."

    - Michelle Malkin CPAC speech 3/1/2019

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=zPeNkqa0_DE

    Leave a comment:


  • DavidSF
    replied
    2/15, 10:45 EST,
    President Trump just announced he is signing a national emergency declaration for our southern border.

    for the record, ABC NEWS has posted a list of national emergencies declared by previous administrations.
    Last edited by DavidSF; 02-15-2019, 08:05 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DavidSF
    replied
    Originally posted by redrover View Post

    y common sense tells me to ignore all the racist fairy tales and remain grounded in reality.
    Hey, Braintrust: “Mexican,” “Latino,” and “Hispanic” are not races. In fact, if you could read, and you were willing to do even a small amount of fact-finding despite your hatred, you could easily figure out those from south of our border are multiple races including European, African, Asian, and Mestizo Indian.

    so your race baiting falls flat, again.

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    As I said above;

    ".....all the hypocrites he loves & supports, were at one time PUBLICLY IN FAVOR OF BORDER SECURITY !!

    If he could read, he would know this..
    ."

    Rover READ ???

    NEVER !!!

    BUT, for those of us who CAN read....

    Illegal immigration and democrats - in their own words

    They were for it UNTIL Donald Trump did the unthinkable.

    Ruined hilary clintons chance to be Americas first "woman president" !!

    HOW DARE HE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Then their irrational hate took over and they've been stupid ever since !

    But we do have their own words . . . .

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    LET DEMOCRATS' OWN WORDS SINK IN


    Sen. Harry Reid (1993) attacking the Republican leadership:

    “If making it easy to be an illegal alien isn’t enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that. Right? Guess again. If you break our laws by entering this country without permission and give birth to a child, we reward that child with U.S. citizenship. And guarantee a full access to all public and social services this society provides. And that’s a lot of services. Is it any wonder that two-thirds of the babies born at taxpayer expense in … county-run hospitals in Los Angeles are born to illegal alien mothers?”

    Sen. Diane Feinstein (1994):

    “We can enforce our borders. I think we should enforce our borders. To have a situation where 40 percent of the babies born on Medicaid in California today are born of illegal immigrants, creates a very real problem for the state. To have 17 percent of our prison population, at a cost of $300 million a year, be illegal immigrants who come here and commit felonies? That’s not what this nation is all about.”

    President Bill Clinton, SOTU address (1995):

    “We are a nation of immigrants.. but we are a nation of laws. Our nation is rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. … Illegal immigrants take jobs from citizens or legal immigrants, they impose burdens on our taxpayers. … That is why we are doubling the number of border guards, deporting more illegal immigrants than ever before, cracking down on illegal hiring, barring benefits to illegal aliens, and we will do more to speed the deportation of illegal immigrants arrest for crimes. … It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws that has occurred in the last few years … and we must do more to stop it.”

    Sen. Tim Kaine (2005):

    “I’m deeply opposed to illegal immigration. And I call on the federal government, the president, and immigration services to stop the in flood of illegal immigrants into this country.”

    Sen. Barack Obama (2006):

    “We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants.”

    Sen. Bernie Sanders (2007):

    “I believe we have very serious immigration problems in this country. I think as you’ve heard today, sanctions against employers who employ illegal immigrants is virtually nonexistent. Our border is very porous. And I think we need a path to citizenship, which I think this bill addresses, in a significant way. My main concern about this bill is what it will do in terms of driving wages down, not only for low-wage workers, but for professional, skilled workers, as well. And I think at a time when the middle class is shrinking, the last thing we need is to bring over, a period of years, millions of people into this country who are prepared to lower wages for American workers. I think it’s a bad idea.”

    Sen. Charles Schumer (2009):

    “Illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple. Until the American people are convinced we will stop future flows of illegal immigration, we will make no progress.”

    Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (2015):

    “I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in. And I do think you have to control your borders.”

    Anti-border wall Democrats need listen to their own words and then explain in their response to the American people why they did such an about-face under Trump. The answer should be obvious: party politics.

    https://www.wnd.com/2019/02/sotu-let...words-sink-in/

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    Originally posted by DavidSF View Post
    Good idea...

    Now redrover won’t have to exert himself actually clicking on the link.
    Not as if it matters, he can't read anyways.

    ... see above where he brings up the unrelated issue of racism regarding border security.

    It's comical really, given that all the hypocrites he loves & supports, were at one time PUBLICLY IN FAVOR OF A BORDER WALL.

    If he could read, he would know this.

    He can't, so he doesn't.

    Only wants to claim a security wall on our border has something to do with racism LOL

    Originally posted by redrover View Post
    y common sense tells me to ignore all the racist fairy tales and remain grounded in reality.
    Yes, you have a very special brand of that common sense you do : )

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X