Democrats want immigrants, but not in their cities

originally posted by: Quantumgamer1776

originally posted by: trb71


He would then also either have to admit he's either lying about immigrant crime rates, or admit that he's intentionally putting american citizens in danger by putting what he believes to be violent criminals right onto their streets. He's backing himself into a corner with this one.

How do you not get that by doing this he’s exposing those exact lies that the Dems have been spouting for years?

He’s forcing them to put their money where their mouth is and practice what they preach, and by doing so he’s exposing their hypocrisy.

Hypocrites and their zealot followers can never see their own hypocrisy, even when exposed and forced to look.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I'd imagine the first humans started the practice of divide to control. "Look over there, those people have mud in their hair, kill them all!"

a reply to: Blaine91555
While I agree with you that neither side has done whats been needed to be done over the years. The deaths caused by illegals not being deported when in custody, is blood on the hands of the Democratic Party, no matter how you slice it, they own that. For that alone, they deserve to have every illegal in their front and backyard that will fit. One death is one to many.

Let the Dems put their money where their mouths are. Their reactions tell you all you need to know about the Dem party, they don't really GAF about these people when they're being directly and adversely effected.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: DBCowboy

I'd imagine the first humans started the practice of divide to control. "Look over there, those people have mud in their hair, kill them all!"

Don't get me started on those damned "Mud-Hairs"!

You keep calling them illegals these latest waves have been asylum seekers and are being treated like dogs. Not very American of us. Not very good samaratin behavior.

originally posted by: trb71
To "own the left" Trump is "proposing" (because I dont think he's being serious) using the supposedly limited budget of ICE to fly/bus/transport illegals to a place that was probably the place they wanted to go to anyway where the judges tend to be more lenient on them.

He would then also either have to admit he's either lying about immigrant crime rates, or admit that he's intentionally putting american citizens in danger by putting what he believes to be violent criminals right onto their streets. He's backing himself into a corner with this one.

Well Trump was just on FOX news and stated CA has claimed they want more people. They have open arms to accept many more people and they have many sanctuary cities. I think he will work on somehow enabling illegal immigrants to easily get to those sanctuary cities. There are 5 sanctuary states (CA, OR CT, RI, VT) and 100's of sanctuary cities across the US. ICE may receive more funding to accomplish helping illegal immigrants get to sanctuary cities????? Because it seems many get there on their own.

Most of the United States’ 10.7 million unauthorized immigrants live in just 20 major metropolitan areas, with the largest populations in New York, Los Angeles, Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth, according to new Pew Research Center estimates based on government data.

The nation’s unauthorized immigrant population is highly concentrated, more so than the U.S. population overall. In 2016, the 20 metro areas with the most unauthorized immigrants were home to 6.5 million of them, or 61% of the estimated nationwide total. By contrast, only 37% of the total U.S. population lived in those metro areas.

www.pewresearch.org...

I don't blame Trump for this because the sanctuary cities, in publicly stating they are a sanctuary city and they are willing to protect illegal immigrants from legal detention or exportation. Interesting enough, based on the 2016 data, the top 3 states for the most illegal immigrants is 1) CA, 2) TX 3) FL.

dbl post

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
You keep calling them illegals these latest waves have been asylum seekers and are being treated like dogs. Not very American of us. Not very good samaratin behavior.

That can't be true, since if they were LEGAL, and seeking asylum, they wouldn't have any problem. Seeking asylum isn't some claim that grants a waiver to following the laws in the first place. Once allowed in, it isn't an issue.

"I broke in, but I'm just seeking asylum. Can I go now?" Riiiggghht!

So if you don't give money to every pan handler you see on the street, is that being a bad Samaritan? You want to make your own rules for saying what is a good Samaritan, but when given the opportunity to actually be one yourself, you run away, just like Nancy Pelosi?

This is why America is in a real quandary right now.

a reply to: conspiracy nut


How many refugees do we sign you up for? Only one bedroom? I assume you have a couch? Its time progressives pay for their own ideology and leave the rest of our tax money out of it.

originally posted by: KTemplar
a reply to: JAGStorm


I couldn’t believe it at first! Well played President Trump for forcing them to show their true intentions 🇺🇸

I bet Trump is one hell of a poker plays.

originally posted by: JOHNMARK012
a reply to: conspiracy nut


How many refugees do we sign you up for? Only one bedroom? I assume you have a couch? Its time progressives pay for their own ideology and leave the rest of our tax money out of it.

My guess is zero, all virtue, no action.

You ever see that Steven Crowder bit where he calls a couple of the organizations pushing for Syrian refugees to be taken in by the US? In the video he claims to be from an organization that’s actually bringing them in and now needs a place for them to stay, and to everyone’s surprise not a single place was willing to take in even one refugee.

These people stand on the soap box and tell everyone to act a certain way but when it’s asked of them personally they come up with every excuse in the book to be exempt from their own rules.

When you take in 2 illegals into your home where your children sleep then maybe you can ask your neighbor to do the same. Leftists never view it locally like that, to them it’s always a problem other people should take on far away and they just get to virtue signal for the book club.

a reply to: Quantumgamer1776

Yes great bit Crowder triggered a few of them lol

originally posted by: JOHNMARK012
a reply to: Quantumgamer1776

Yes great bit Crowder triggered a few of them lol

I just wish we could have seen the panicked look on their faces as they tried to think of reasons not to do what they were calling on other to do, if I remember right at least one of them hung up on Crowder.

a reply to: mtnshredder

I'm not a Republican or Democrat so I can criticize both and rightly so. Both parties have had times they could have dealt with this and did not. I don't think either party wants to give up this wedge issue, so I suppose that means neither really care.

Since I've had a family member slaughtered by an illegal in a sanctuary city, I do agree that the sanctuary city crowd has blood on their hands. This topic however is about what to do with people applying for asylum at the border right now and Trumps suggestion, not that.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

I believe we can have a heart and still enforce our laws. Right now we are not dealing with the situation humanely.

I believe we need a solution that tackles the issue on a variety of fronts from tough love to sympathy but what is happening right now is shameful. Blame lies on all sides but now that trump has thrust the issue in to the media spotlight all eyes will be on him and his administration as to how they handles this.

"The crisis at the border" is Trump's Obamacare.

a reply to: JOHNMARK012

This is a terrible agrument you guys keep bringing up and it doesn't work that way. I would be willing to give a little extra out of my paycheck to pay for "some" refugees, you see I am reasonable I am not calling for 100 million plus refugees to be allowed in. When you want to start talking about reasonable solutions and not "well how many illegals are you gonna let in your house" or " build the wall don't let anymore in we are full" then we can have an honest discussion.

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
a reply to: JOHNMARK012

This is a terrible agrument you guys keep bringing up and it doesn't work that way. I would be willing to give a little extra out of my paycheck to pay for "some" refugees, you see I am reasonable I am not calling for 100 million plus refugees to be allowed in. When you want to start talking about reasonable solutions and not "well how many illegals are you gonna let in your house" or " build the wall don't let anymore in we are full" then we can have an honest discussion.

I take that as a no?

President should not be using humans as pawns.
Simple.

originally posted by: spacedoubt
President should not be using humans a pawns.
Simple.

Democrats should not be using so called refugees for votes. Of course they don't want them in Sanctuary city's they are already perma blue... They want them in red areas, got to flip them to blue via demographic changes. Everyone who is honest knows this is the only reason they care for illegals and so called refugees.


Why doesnt Pelosi want them in S.F. now? hmmmmmmmmmmm

originally posted by: conspiracy nut
You keep calling them illegals these latest waves have been asylum seekers and are being treated like dogs. Not very American of us. Not very good samaratin behavior.

Asylum seekers are illegal if they come in, are not granted asylum, and then stay. They are also illegal if they come in, cross the border, are not caught, and then stay and never request asylum.

Remove birthright citizenship and make it so you need to prove you are here legally before kids are given citizenship, auto deport illegals, and then I am fine with Asylum seekers coming in asap.