Let's Talk About Trump's Extreme Vetting and Ideological Certification

a reply to: amicktd

You asked a simple question that should be common knowledge for anyone weighing in on this topic. That speech was made a day ago, and that phrase has been all over the news.

In point of fact, I am familiar with your "numbers" and where they come from ... and I know that they come from right-wing media/conservative "think tanks" etc.

Skip it. You offer no backup for your claims; I say they are bogus and the result of right-wing propaganda.

/shrug

a reply to: amicktd

You can knock whatever sources you want, but the fact stands that the only media outlets directly involved with a Party are liberal sources.

Really?

Sean Hannity Turns Adviser in the Service of Donald Trump

Roger Ailes Is Advising Donald Trump Ahead of Presidential Debates

Donald Trump Hires Breitbart's Steve Bannon to Run Campaign


Yeah...I think you are wrong.

originally posted by: amicktd

You can knock whatever sources you want, but the fact stands that the only media outlets directly involved with a Party are liberal sources.

You've got to be kidding.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: amicktd

You asked a simple question that should be common knowledge for anyone weighing in on this topic. That speech was made a day ago, and that phrase has been all over the news.

In point of fact, I am familiar with your "numbers" and where they come from ... and I know that they come from right-wing media/conservative "think tanks" etc.

Skip it. You offer no backup for your claims; I say they are bogus and the result of right-wing propaganda.

/shrug

Yep the speech was made a day ago. I've been busy the last couple days with real life. Didn't think asking for a source, which I thought was required per ATS T&C's was a big deal until you made it one. Then go on to complain about sourcing info. The hypocrisy from you is in full effect I guess.

a reply to: amicktd

Asking for a source is not a problem. You know as well as I do that it's also a rhetorical tactic.

Before I ask for sources, I at least do a cursory search to see what pops up. If it doesn't pop up in the first ten or so, it's usually a bogus claim.

You want to whine and post unsubstantiated garbage, as I said, that's on you. That way, it's must easier to call it for the BS it is.

a reply to: Gryphon66

I should have clarified...you are right...but there are still 11 million people here who should not be that cost us as taxpayers billions each year.

It is also not falling because of Obamas efforts...it is because the economy in Mexico is starting to match the US so there is not as much need to flee, jobs in Mexico and not too many in the US. But if you can come here, get relocated and then free benefits why not come in...just legally.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Gryphon66

I should have clarified...you are right...but there are still 11 million people here who should not be that cost us as taxpayers billions each year.

It is also not falling because of Obamas efforts...it is because the economy in Mexico is starting to match the US so there is not as much need to flee, jobs in Mexico and not too many in the US. But if you can come here, get relocated and then free benefits why not come in...just legally.

Yeah yeah, I know the normal patter ...

These are the relevant facts that back up my claims:

1. Obama's administration has deported more illegals than any in recent history, and,

2. Illegal immigration (your comments about Mexico ignore than about half of the illegals are not FROM Mexico) has stabilized and is declining.

I make these claims to counter the stupid insinuations that our laws are not being enforced and that there is an open border.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Trump does not think it is easy either. He has said he wants all illegals gone. End catch and release. Back in the day they put them on a school bus back to Mexico. Now it is rights for the illegal immigrant and they are people too. Yes, but it is not my fault nor the US taxpayer you were born in a #hole in Mexico or some other country.

1 in 30 kids in the US is homeless. That is roughly 2.5 million kids. This number is rising. 1 million since 2010. I want my tax dollars to go to them and not illegal immigrants. The only way to do that is to get rid of what is taking the money from those who actually live here.

I am not cold hearted but I put my country first.

a reply to: Gryphon66

If it has been leveled off for 8 years...well...it is not being enforced is it? We just keep spending on it maybe?

There are great programs for ICE, CBP and what they call US-VISIT but it is not talked about. I mean, we have started the job that Trump wants to finish. DNA testing started a few years back. No one in the MSM talks about it but they are starting to track people who enter the country legally.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Well I'm unsure if you looked because I found a ton of sources with the same claim. Here are 4 of them, but I could source more.

Source

Source

Source

Source

a reply to: matafuchs

I would never call you cold-hearted, matafuchs, as I know personally that you aren't.

However.

Trump suggests that we are just letting the border lay open, and that we do not already send illegals back. He's going to "start that" ... and that's just a lie. You know it, I know it.

I'd love to see us helping homeless kids and homeless adults. It's heartbreaking. Again, a complex problem to solve, but the typical right-wing response (not your response) is to claim that "we don't' want our tax money going to keep people up." Any social program is anathema. You know this too.

It's not a matter of "loving one's country." It's a matter of dealing with the facts ... and Trump doesn't deal with facts.

He says what sounds good to his base.

a reply to: kruphix


Ok so do you want to talk about Trump or McCarthy? Besides McCarthy was right Reds were everywhere but unfortunate for him they had infiltrated everything by then.

originally posted by: amicktd
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well I'm unsure if you looked because I found a ton of sources with the same claim. Here are 4 of them, but I could source more.

Source

Source

Source

Source

Reference what I said above about propaganda sites and try again.

originally posted by: kruphix
a reply to: odzeandennz

When i used to travel to arab countries, we had to abide by their laws and values. If it was a dry country, no alcohol, women had to cover up etc... why are there issues when it comes to our American values?

Should we aspire to be like those Arab countries?

Or should be aspire to be the example of freedom?

Freedom? The question is really why should we not guard against ideologies that are contrary to say the constitution? Why would we be obligated above others to fundamentally change the ideologies that protect freedom?

originally posted by: amicktd
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well I'm unsure if you looked because I found a ton of sources with the same claim. Here are 4 of them, but I could source more.

Source

Source

Source

Source

Interesting. This quote is from your third link:

Americans believe that undocumented immigrants are exploiting the United States' economy. The widespread belief is that illegal aliens cost more in government services than they contribute to the economy. This belief is undeniably false... [E]very empirical study of illegals' economic impact demonstrates the opposite: undocumenteds actually contribute more to public coffers in taxes than they cost in social services. Moreover, undocumented immigrants contribute to the U.S. economy through their investments and consumption of goods and services; filling of millions of essential worker positions resulting in subsidiary job creation, increased productivity and lower costs of goods and services; and unrequited contributions to Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance programs. Eighty-five percent of eminent economists surveyed [according to the Dec. 1995 study by Julian L. Simon, "Immigration, the Demographic & Economic Facts," of the Cato Institute and the National Immigration Forum] have concluded that undocumented immigrants have had a positive (seventy-four percent) or neutral (eleven percent) impact on the U.S. economy."

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: amicktd
a reply to: Gryphon66

Well I'm unsure if you looked because I found a ton of sources with the same claim. Here are 4 of them, but I could source more.

Source

Source

Source

Source

Reference what I said above about propaganda sites and try again.

Oh I see, only sources that back your opinion are acceptable to you. I won't waste my time anymore, have a nice day.

a reply to: kruphix

Extreme Vetting

It appears that this is what you call reasonable precautions. You apparently want someone to support your 'extreme' labeling.

a reply to: DelMarvel

From a study done in 1995, which used data from years before when the total illegal immigration population was only a 1/4 the size of todays. This also doesn't include the fact that Hillary want's to add them all to the ACA which will cost tax payers even more.

originally posted by: amicktd
a reply to: DelMarvel

From a study done in 1995, which used data from years before when the total illegal immigration population was only a 1/4 the size of todays. This also doesn't include the fact that Hillary want's to add them all to the ACA which will cost tax payers even more.

Oh, but all the old research on that site that confirms you position IS valid?

Here's another quote from your link:

In 2012, researchers at the Cato Institute estimated that a mass deportations policy would reduce economic growth by around $250 billion per year.

originally posted by: DelMarvel

originally posted by: amicktd
a reply to: DelMarvel

From a study done in 1995, which used data from years before when the total illegal immigration population was only a 1/4 the size of todays. This also doesn't include the fact that Hillary want's to add them all to the ACA which will cost tax payers even more.

Oh, but all the old research on that site that confirms you position IS valid?

Here's another quote from your link:

In 2012, researchers at the Cato Institute estimated that a mass deportations policy would reduce economic growth by around $250 billion per year.

Maybe you didn't notice, but the site has a pro and con section. But, I guess my source is bias right?