[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

What are you listening to now? - KMH - Jan 25, 2022 - 2:09pm
 
What is the meaning of this? - oldviolin - Jan 25, 2022 - 2:01pm
 
Tax the Rich! - islander - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:54pm
 
Won’t support you until - oldviolin - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:51pm
 
What Did You Do Today? - Bill_J - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:33pm
 
Wordle - daily game - oldviolin - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:29pm
 
Russia - R_P - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:28pm
 
Neil Young - Red_Dragon - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:22pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:15pm
 
Submissions is broken - oldviolin - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:12pm
 
Audio Processing - BillG - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:07pm
 
New Music - R_P - Jan 25, 2022 - 1:04pm
 
Headphones for the hard of hearing? - westslope - Jan 25, 2022 - 12:27pm
 
Got a good recipe you care to share ??? - ScottFromWyoming - Jan 25, 2022 - 11:43am
 
Name My Band - Bill_J - Jan 25, 2022 - 8:46am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jan 25, 2022 - 8:29am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - oldviolin - Jan 25, 2022 - 8:17am
 
Bitcoin - rgio - Jan 25, 2022 - 5:48am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - Jan 25, 2022 - 5:21am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - miamizsun - Jan 25, 2022 - 4:50am
 
Europe - Ohmsen - Jan 25, 2022 - 2:16am
 
Things You Thought Today - haresfur - Jan 24, 2022 - 11:14pm
 
Trump - westslope - Jan 24, 2022 - 4:59pm
 
Weather Out Your Window - Manbird - Jan 24, 2022 - 2:34pm
 
Evolution! - R_P - Jan 24, 2022 - 2:11pm
 
Happy Birthday! - Manbird - Jan 24, 2022 - 2:07pm
 
France - Ohmsen - Jan 24, 2022 - 11:07am
 
COVID-19 - R_P - Jan 24, 2022 - 11:05am
 
Joe Biden - Steely_D - Jan 24, 2022 - 9:59am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - KurtfromLaQuinta - Jan 24, 2022 - 9:38am
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - islander - Jan 24, 2022 - 6:53am
 
Germany - westslope - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:24pm
 
Republican Party - Steely_D - Jan 23, 2022 - 7:54pm
 
The Obituary Page - Bill_J - Jan 23, 2022 - 6:20pm
 
The Dragons' Roost - triskele - Jan 23, 2022 - 2:40pm
 
Jimi Hendrix Memorial - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 1:52pm
 
Pictures I've taken and like. No promises! - oldviolin - Jan 23, 2022 - 12:34pm
 
Australia and New Zealand Music - NoEnzLefttoSplit - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:45am
 
Counting with Pictures - Proclivities - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:37am
 
Play the Blues - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:35am
 
The war on funk is over! - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:22am
 
Classical? - oldviolin - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:16am
 
I play the drums... - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 11:01am
 
Jam! (why should a song stop) - Ohmsen - Jan 23, 2022 - 10:12am
 
What Makes You Sad? - geoff_morphini - Jan 23, 2022 - 10:12am
 
Today in History - GeneP59 - Jan 22, 2022 - 8:28pm
 
Positive Thoughts and Prayer Requests - oldviolin - Jan 22, 2022 - 4:56pm
 
The Dragon's Roots - triskele - Jan 22, 2022 - 3:30pm
 
Lyrics that are stuck in your head today... - Manbird - Jan 22, 2022 - 1:46pm
 
A motivational quote - GeneP59 - Jan 22, 2022 - 11:40am
 
What are you doing RIGHT NOW? - GeneP59 - Jan 22, 2022 - 11:15am
 
Make Scott laugh - Manbird - Jan 22, 2022 - 10:07am
 
ptooey Must Go! - islander - Jan 22, 2022 - 7:59am
 
• • • What Makes You Happy? • • •  - oldviolin - Jan 21, 2022 - 10:42pm
 
Kids say the funniest things - oldviolin - Jan 21, 2022 - 9:42pm
 
Star Trek - Manbird - Jan 21, 2022 - 8:46pm
 
Thank You Radio Paradise. - Manbird - Jan 21, 2022 - 6:14pm
 
DQ (as in 'Daily Quote') - Manbird - Jan 21, 2022 - 4:21pm
 
RightWingNutZ - westslope - Jan 21, 2022 - 4:21pm
 
Coffee - Manbird - Jan 21, 2022 - 2:31pm
 
Graphic designers, ho's! - Manbird - Jan 21, 2022 - 12:22pm
 
Election Predictions - miamizsun - Jan 21, 2022 - 6:20am
 
Florida - miamizsun - Jan 21, 2022 - 6:09am
 
how do you feel right now? - kurtster - Jan 20, 2022 - 10:50pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - Proclivities - Jan 20, 2022 - 1:54pm
 
let it spin!! - oldviolin - Jan 20, 2022 - 11:41am
 
Advice? - black321 - Jan 20, 2022 - 11:29am
 
Race in America - R_P - Jan 20, 2022 - 10:45am
 
2020 Elections - Red_Dragon - Jan 20, 2022 - 10:26am
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - Ohmsen - Jan 20, 2022 - 9:09am
 
Comics! - Proclivities - Jan 20, 2022 - 7:09am
 
TEXAS - Red_Dragon - Jan 20, 2022 - 7:09am
 
Geeky Jokes - nu11 - Jan 20, 2022 - 6:58am
 
Anti-War - Ohmsen - Jan 20, 2022 - 5:41am
 
Afghanistan - Ohmsen - Jan 20, 2022 - 5:19am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Immigration Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 35, 36, 37  Next
Post to this Topic
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 6:39pm

What I have to say on the immigration issue...

If the world is gonna play the nation state game, then borders have to mean something. 
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 4:03pm

 kurtster wrote:


#1  You mockingly tried to shift the subject from the present to the past by mentioning that we had these problems prior to Obama, which we did.  What does the unbuilt fence have to do with this ?  Well if it was built and finished as intended, it would change the subject a little.  But it has not been built to the extent of the 2006 HR.  Congress controls the purse strings and who ran Congress from 2006 to 2010 ?

#2  Its a 10th Amendment issue because the Federal government ala Obama has abrogated its responsibities to defend the country against enemies, both foreign and domestic.

#3  Yes, it has expanded exponentially under Obama.  We have bullets flying actoss the border and hitting buildings in the State of Texas.  That never happened before.  Well maybe during the days of Pancho Villa, but not since.  We have the case of Fast and Furious.  We have the case of Arizona being the kidnapping capital of the world, all new under Obama.

 
Actually, if you look back, you will see that  I was responding to this statement of yours:

We didn't have an American president talking about moats and alligators for border protection before Obama.

I was pointing out that we were talking about building a fence on the border well before Obama took office.  So your accusations of my trying to shift the subject fails. The bouncing ball is of your making.  

And the Supreme Court is looking at a pre-emption issue. You simply refuse to acknowledge that part of the issue because it does not fit in with your political agenda.

There is a drug war going on iin Mexico, and it has spilled over the borders into Texas and Arizona. The amount of deaths in Mexico has escalated exponentially in the last several years. There has been much written about that.  The Obama administration — and whomever succeeds him — will have to deal with this problem vis-a-vis our borders.  The drug war being waged by the U.S. for decades now is a failed policy.  Laying the blame all at Obama's feet defies logic and common sense.    
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 3:58pm

 oldslabsides wrote:


I gotta wonder why I bother posting sometimes. {#Arrowd}

 

Maybe because yer a mitt-a-gator ?

When we talk about borders, its about Obama and all-i-gators.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 3:52pm

 steeler wrote:


Paragraph 1:  I believe  those advocating building a fence on the border were concerned with illegal immigration and terrorism.  I did not change the subject. Those advocating that the fence be built were doing so before Obama took office.  

Paragraph 2:  It is an issue before the Supreme Court.  I would not label it a constitutional crisis. It is a federal pre-emption issue that is rather nuanced, but it is not manufactured by Obama as you seem to believe and have implied.  

Paragraphs 3 and 4: lllegal immigration from Mexico, or through Mexico, has been a problem for a long time. It is fair to focus on what we are doing about it now. But, per usual, your earlier posts assailed Obama and implied that the problem has grown exponentially during Obama's term.     

 

#1  You mockingly tried to shift the subject from the present to the past by mentioning that we had these problems prior to Obama, which we did.  What does the unbuilt fence have to do with this ?  Well if it was built and finished as intended, it would change the subject a little.  But it has not been built to the extent of the 2006 HR.  Congress controls the purse strings and who ran Congress from 2006 to 2010 ?

#2  Its a 10th Amendment issue because the Federal government ala Obama has abrogated its responsibities to defend the country against enemies, both foreign and domestic.

#3  Yes, it has expanded exponentially under Obama.  We have bullets flying actoss the border and hitting buildings in the State of Texas.  That never happened before.  Well maybe during the days of Pancho Villa, but not since.  We have the case of Fast and Furious.  We have the case of Arizona being the kidnapping capital of the world, all new under Obama.
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 3:28pm

 kurtster wrote:


I thought we were talking about legal versus illegal immigration and its present situation.  Everyone keeps changing the subject by trying to talk about it in the past tense and trying to ingnore that there is an illegal immigration problem by painting those against illegal immigration as being against any kind of immigration.  I'm trying to keep it on what is happening now.

Sure we can talk about how we got here, but that doesn't matter anymore, does it ?  We now have a Constitutional crisis manufactured because of our current POTUS' position on illegal immigration and what sovreignty is.

Why he is so concerned about about it that he is promising to get it fixed in the first year of his second term, just like he promised to do in the first year of his first term.  Gimme a flippin break.

Any conversation on the subject has to include and be about who is currently in charge and responsible for the current situation, doesn't it ?  Or would you simply like to talk about straw ?

 

Paragraph 1:  I believe  those advocating building a fence on the border were concerned with illegal immigration and terrorism.  I did not change the subject. Those advocating that the fence be built were doing so before Obama took office.  

Paragraph 2:  It is an issue before the Supreme Court.  I would not label it a constitutional crisis. It is a federal pre-emption issue that is rather nuanced, but it is not manufactured by Obama as you seem to believe and have implied.  

Paragraphs 3 and 4: lllegal immigration from Mexico, or through Mexico, has been a problem for a long time. It is fair to focus on what we are doing about it now. But, per usual, your earlier posts assailed Obama and implied that the problem has grown exponentially during Obama's term.     


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 3:02pm

 steeler wrote:


What are you talking about?

Talk about building a fence along the border between Mexico and the U.S. surfaced well before Obama took office.

See, for example:

House Resolution 6061 (H.R. 6061), "Secure Fence Act of 2006", was introduced on September 13, 2006. It passed through the U.S. House of Representatives on September 14, 2006 with a vote of 283–138.



 

I thought we were talking about legal versus illegal immigration and its present situation.  Everyone keeps changing the subject by trying to talk about it in the past tense and trying to ingnore that there is an illegal immigration problem by painting those against illegal immigration as being against any kind of immigration.  I'm trying to keep it on what is happening now.

Sure we can talk about how we got here, but that doesn't matter anymore, does it ?  We now have a Constitutional crisis manufactured because of our current POTUS' position on illegal immigration and what sovreignty is.

Why he is so concerned about about it that he is promising to get it fixed in the first year of his second term, just like he promised to do in the first year of his first term.  Gimme a flippin break.

Any conversation on the subject has to include and be about who is currently in charge and responsible for the current situation, doesn't it ?  Or would you simply like to talk about straw ?


Monkeysdad

Monkeysdad Avatar

Location: Simi Valley, CA
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:55pm

 steeler wrote:


There was little illegal immigration before Obama?

I just read a story in the Washington Post the other day about how the immigration from Mexico is waning.  

 
Heard it on NPR yesterday too. But that's all it's doing, waning, not down dramatically, waning. Less jobs to cross the border for = waning, not "the issue is fixed"...come an economic recovery, which we all know is just around the corner the problem will resurface.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:31pm

 kurtster wrote:


OK, screw the immigration issue then.  We have a full tilt flippin war on the border that wasn't happenning before 2009.

 
Legalize it.{#Cowboy}I agree Obama is not handling our relationship with Mexico and the drug war any better than the rest of em.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:29pm

 sirdroseph wrote:

Yep, no one has ever talked about illegal immigration before January 2009. That was the first time I ever heard of anyone entering this country illegally.

 

OK, screw the immigration issue then.  We have a full tilt flippin war on the border that wasn't happenning before 2009.
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:29pm

 kurtster wrote:

What kind of immigration is waning from Mexico ?  Legal or illegal ?

Before Obama, there wasn't much shooting and open war on the border.  States were not calling for federal troops at the borders before Obama, to my knowledge.  US law enforcement officers were not getting killed with weapons sold by the US governent to Mexican war lords before Obama.

We didn't have an American president talking about moats and alligators for border protection before Obama.

 

What are you talking about?

Talk about building a fence along the border between Mexico and the U.S. surfaced well before Obama took office.

See, for example:

House Resolution 6061 (H.R. 6061), "Secure Fence Act of 2006", was introduced on September 13, 2006. It passed through the U.S. House of Representatives on September 14, 2006 with a vote of 283–138.


steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:25pm

 sirdroseph wrote:

There was no illegal immigration before Obama; nor was there crime or dwarf tossing.

 

No terrorism, either.  And no al-Queda, war in Iraq, war in Afghanistan, strife in Pakistan. All that amped up when Obama took office. Bin Laden did not exist as a threat until he was taken out under Obama's watch.  Wait . . . that last one isn't coming out the way it should.    


sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:25pm

 kurtster wrote:

What kind of immigration is waning from Mexico ?  Legal or illegal ?

Before Obama, there wasn't much shooting and open war on the border.  States were not calling for federal troops at the borders before Obama, to my knowledge.  US law enforcement officers were not getting killed with weapons sold by the US governent to Mexican war lords before Obama.

We didn't have an American president talking about moats and alligators for border protection before Obama.

 
Yep, no one has ever talked about illegal immigration before January 2009. That was the first time I ever heard of anyone entering this country illegally.


kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:22pm

 steeler wrote:


There was little illegal immigration before Obama?

I just read a story in the Washington Post the other day about how the immigration from Mexico is waning.  

 
What kind of immigration is waning from Mexico ?  Legal or illegal ?

Before Obama, there wasn't much shooting and open war on the border.  States were not calling for federal troops at the borders before Obama, to my knowledge.  US law enforcement officers were not getting killed with weapons sold by the US governent to Mexican war lords before Obama.

We didn't have an American president talking about moats and alligators for border protection before Obama.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:21pm

 steeler wrote:


There was little illegal immigration before Obama?

I just read a story in the Washington Post the other day about how the immigration from Mexico is waning.  

 
There was no illegal immigration before Obama; nor was there crime or dwarf tossing.
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:20pm

 oldslabsides wrote:


I gotta wonder why I bother posting sometimes. {#Arrowd}

 

Yep, that's the one.

Sorry, I did not scroll down even a tad. I thought I spotted in earlier in here, but then forgot about it.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:18pm

 steeler wrote:


There was little illegal immigration before Obama?

I just read a story in the Washington Post the other day about how the immigration from Mexico is waning.  

 

I gotta wonder why I bother posting sometimes. {#Arrowd}
steeler

steeler Avatar

Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 2:14pm

 kurtster wrote:

Did they sneak in by getting off the boat somewhere else before it docked in SF ?  No they showed up and tried to enter the old fashioned way, publicly and subject to the rules in force at the time.  Their entranced was challenged and they had their days in court.  Nothing sneaky or underhanded about how they tried to enter the country.  Yes, the California law was not a good one and it went all the way to the SCOTUS, as it should.

Arizona and the other states mirror federal law in that they are trying to enforce federal laws that are purposely not being enforced by Obama.  They are not saying what the criteria is for being here legally as was California in your example.  These states are simply determining whether or not people are here with proper federal documents and if not, capture and turn them over to the INS.  If Obama was properly performing his Constitutionally designated duties we would not have this Constitutional crisis.  This Constitutional scholar has no clue as we have seen in his outlandish statements regarding the power and duties of the SCOTUS in his attempts to bully the court into keeping the ACA intact.

 

There was little illegal immigration before Obama?

I just read a story in the Washington Post the other day about how the immigration from Mexico is waning.  
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 1:37pm

 aflanigan wrote:


Not according to the guy who tried to keep them out using the California law.

Setting immigration policy is, and should be, the federal government's job.  Arizona has no business setting themselves up to do it.

 
Did they sneak in by getting off the boat somewhere else before it docked in SF ?  No they showed up and tried to enter the old fashioned way, publicly and subject to the rules in force at the time.  Their entranced was challenged and they had their days in court.  Nothing sneaky or underhanded about how they tried to enter the country.  Yes, the California law was not a good one and it went all the way to the SCOTUS, as it should.

Arizona and the other states mirror federal law in that they are trying to enforce federal laws that are purposely not being enforced by Obama.  They are not saying what the criteria is for being here legally as was California in your example.  These states are simply determining whether or not people are here with proper federal documents and if not, capture and turn them over to the INS.  If Obama was properly performing his Constitutionally designated duties we would not have this Constitutional crisis.  This Constitutional scholar has no clue as we have seen in his outlandish statements regarding the power and duties of the SCOTUS in his attempts to bully the court into keeping the ACA intact.


cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 9:40am

 aflanigan wrote:
Not according to the guy who tried to keep them out using the California law.

Setting immigration policy is, and should be, the federal government's job.  Arizona has no business setting themselves up to do it.
 
Aye, there's the rub. The feds have completely abdicated their responsibility, which is why we're in this mess. The border states are trying to do something, ANYTHING, about illegal immigration, since the federal government has just kicked it around. I don't agree with the states' actions, but I understand their frustration.

aflanigan

aflanigan Avatar

Location: At Sea
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 25, 2012 - 9:32am

 kurtster wrote:

Nice story an all.  But it is about people who tried to enter legally into this country.
 

Not according to the guy who tried to keep them out using the California law.

Setting immigration policy is, and should be, the federal government's job.  Arizona has no business setting themselves up to do it.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 35, 36, 37  Next