Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The current law is an unlimited number of people without permission are allowed in every day. They just come in and say I'd like to apply for asylum and they're in. Takes over 5 years for a hearing. Some kind of quota on that number seems more reasonable than the current law which is all of them can come in and claim assylum.
On the one hand you have the people that want all the browns deported for looking brown and on the other hand you have the people that think the current law that everyone can come in and claim assylum all the time is totally awesome. Somewhere in the middle... aka a compromise... lies the answer.
"The current law is an unlimited number of people without permission are allowed in every day"
Zero illegals should be allowed. Everybody knows that's not possible, but it should be the goal. Those crossing the southern border should have to apply and get approved just like those from other countries.
"Those crossing the southern border should have to apply and get approved just like those from other countries"
Now, here's a CNN article giving details. It says that if an average of 4,000 illegal aliens/day cross the border during one week, they MAY close the border, and of 5,000 cross, then they MUST close the border. And if 8,500 cross on a single day, then they also MUST close the border.
This is a "compromise"???
Whatever happened to "NO ONE may cross illegally"?
Indeed, I have to shake my head and repeat what you said: "This is a compromise?" I have a better idea. We close the border to ALL illegal migrants. In return, we relieve the financial pressure on liberal sanctuary cities that say they are buckling under the weight of all the illegals that have been shipped there.
On the one hand you have the people that want all the browns deported for looking brown and on the other hand you have the people that think the current law that everyone can come in and claim assylum all the time is totally awesome. Somewhere in the middle... aka a compromise... lies the answer.
It's very hard to compromise with someone who automatically ascribes racist motives to anyone who wants to restrict illegal immigration. I realize that leftists think anyone to the right of Hillary Clinton is an irredeemable racist, but are you able to grant that maybe, just maybe, there might be something else besides racism that motivates conservative opposition to unfettered illegal migration?
Just heard some newsreaders on TV say that a "compromise" bill between the House and Senate has come out. Just a TV story so far, haven't found a link yet.
Its main tenet seems to be that, if more than 8,000 illegal aliens come across the border in one month, THEN the border will be closed. No word on for how long.
Does this mean that a "quota" of 7,999 illegal aliens per month will be permitted?
Anybody else heard about this?
As far as I can tell, it is NOT an article from the Babylon Bee... though it should be.
I have found no articles describing what this compromise has inside. Here's an article from yesterday, predicting the compromise's collapse, and blaming everything on Trump of course... but giving no details:
It's very hard to compromise with someone who automatically ascribes racist motives to anyone who wants to restrict illegal immigration. I realize that leftists think anyone to the right of Hillary Clinton is an irredeemable racist, but are you able to grant that maybe, just maybe, there might be something else besides racism that motivates conservative opposition to unfettered illegal migration?
That was not at all what he said. He was referring to the fringe on the end of the spectrum.
Are you saying there are no conservatives who want to stop immigration simply because they are racists and/or xenophobes?
The GOP needs to come up with an alternative plan. So far all they can do is criticize. There should be an alternative plan coming out of the House, but can they even agree among themselves?
I think in 248 years the government has been "empowered" to secure the Border.
We no longer have a government with any responsibility to the People.
Those days are gone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
