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

Wordle - daily game - maryte - May 23, 2022 - 6:20am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - miamizsun - May 23, 2022 - 5:34am
 
MQA available on ifi Zen - miamizsun - May 23, 2022 - 5:33am
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - sunybuny - May 23, 2022 - 5:24am
 
That's good advice - miamizsun - May 23, 2022 - 5:22am
 
History of past donations? - miamizsun - May 23, 2022 - 4:56am
 
What Did You Do Today? - miamizsun - May 23, 2022 - 4:55am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - miamizsun - May 23, 2022 - 4:40am
 
A Little Psychedelic Jazz-Rock Never Hurts - haresfur - May 23, 2022 - 3:42am
 
Questions. - haresfur - May 22, 2022 - 9:24pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Red_Dragon - May 22, 2022 - 8:54pm
 
Name My Band - Red_Dragon - May 22, 2022 - 6:14pm
 
The Dragons' Roost - Red_Dragon - May 22, 2022 - 5:36pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - Red_Dragon - May 22, 2022 - 4:50pm
 
The Obituary Page - GeneP59 - May 22, 2022 - 3:25pm
 
Counting with Pictures - ScottN - May 22, 2022 - 8:02am
 
• • •  What's For Dinner ? • • •  - miamizsun - May 21, 2022 - 3:29pm
 
Reccomended System or Powered Speakers - miamizsun - May 21, 2022 - 2:29pm
 
Trump - Lazy8 - May 21, 2022 - 7:05am
 
Today, I learned... - Proclivities - May 21, 2022 - 7:02am
 
MQA Stream Coming to BLUOS - nickt1 - May 21, 2022 - 1:09am
 
Live Music - oldviolin - May 20, 2022 - 7:06pm
 
Favorite Quotes - Bill_J - May 20, 2022 - 7:05pm
 
What is the meaning of this? - oldviolin - May 20, 2022 - 7:04pm
 
Neil Young - oldviolin - May 20, 2022 - 6:50pm
 
songs for drella - haresfur - May 20, 2022 - 5:47pm
 
Chicago 25 Or 6 To 4 - Steely_D - May 20, 2022 - 2:42pm
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - May 20, 2022 - 6:05am
 
Derplahoma! - sunybuny - May 20, 2022 - 5:41am
 
Unquiet Minds - Mental Health Forum - miamizsun - May 20, 2022 - 5:16am
 
songs that ROCK! - Red_Dragon - May 19, 2022 - 5:10pm
 
Online Radio Platforms - Steely_D - May 19, 2022 - 4:03pm
 
Brag about your stereo - miamizsun - May 19, 2022 - 3:16pm
 
All Dogs Go To Heaven - Dog Pix - islander - May 19, 2022 - 3:00pm
 
COVID-19 - Red_Dragon - May 19, 2022 - 1:50pm
 
Testing your Metal? - oldviolin - May 19, 2022 - 12:11pm
 
Ukraine - NoEnzLefttoSplit - May 19, 2022 - 10:37am
 
Help Finding A Song - nightdrive - May 19, 2022 - 10:19am
 
Lyrics - oldviolin - May 19, 2022 - 8:17am
 
New Song Submissions system - danielh - May 19, 2022 - 2:09am
 
What Makes You Sad? - Coaxial - May 18, 2022 - 6:42pm
 
NASA & other news from space - GeneP59 - May 18, 2022 - 4:37pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - GeneP59 - May 18, 2022 - 4:12pm
 
Guided Meditation by Bill - thisbody - May 18, 2022 - 2:45pm
 
January 20th, 2005 ~ Boycott And Meditation Day - thisbody - May 18, 2022 - 2:34pm
 
Economix - thisbody - May 18, 2022 - 1:48pm
 
Japan - Red_Dragon - May 18, 2022 - 10:58am
 
Race in America - Red_Dragon - May 18, 2022 - 7:36am
 
North Korea - Red_Dragon - May 17, 2022 - 9:07pm
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 17, 2022 - 11:24am
 
"2000 Mules" movie purports to prove 2020 election was st... - rgio - May 17, 2022 - 7:02am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - May 16, 2022 - 8:44pm
 
Buddy's Haven - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 6:31pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 6:18pm
 
Environment - Red_Dragon - May 16, 2022 - 4:42pm
 
RightWingNutZ - Red_Dragon - May 16, 2022 - 4:24pm
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 3:24pm
 
New Music - miamizsun - May 16, 2022 - 12:37pm
 
• • • Clownstock • • •  - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 10:17am
 
What the hell OV? - miamizsun - May 16, 2022 - 9:40am
 
Supreme Court Rulings - Red_Dragon - May 16, 2022 - 9:33am
 
Outstanding Covers - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 8:35am
 
Watching My Mind Slip Away... - oldviolin - May 16, 2022 - 6:05am
 
Great Old Songs You Rarely Hear Anymore - Alchemist - May 15, 2022 - 10:12pm
 
TuneIn difficulties - KurtfromLaQuinta - May 15, 2022 - 7:02pm
 
Terrorist Watch! - Steely_D - May 15, 2022 - 5:17pm
 
Climate Change - Red_Dragon - May 15, 2022 - 1:31pm
 
Spain - Red_Dragon - May 15, 2022 - 11:04am
 
Get Your Godcast! - Red_Dragon - May 14, 2022 - 4:52pm
 
TV shows you watch - Red_Dragon - May 14, 2022 - 4:03pm
 
Republican Party - rgio - May 14, 2022 - 3:15pm
 
The Abortion Wars - Red_Dragon - May 14, 2022 - 2:20pm
 
Guns - Red_Dragon - May 14, 2022 - 2:08pm
 
Finland - Red_Dragon - May 14, 2022 - 11:28am
 
CRAZY Flooding Video! - Red_Dragon - May 14, 2022 - 7:35am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Immigration Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 35, 36, 37  Next
Post to this Topic
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.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: Apr 24, 2012 - 6:15pm

The rate of Mexican immigration to the US has stalled or maybe even gone into reverse, an analysis shows, ending a four-decade-long trend.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 35, 36, 37  Next