Sessions rescinds DACA

[jayjayj 571]

Just now, smilesammich said:

ikr. and here i thought obummer already torched it.

He was a Constitutional scholar! Why would he torch it?

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

2 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Theoretically, the youngest to qualify under the Obama "kick this can down the road", "I don't have the right to change the laws put into place by congress", DACA thing could be 10 and some change today.  Assuming they arrived prior to 15 June 2007 at the tender age of a month or two and never left.  I read the average age is 22.  The oldest would be 35.  That would put the majority over 18, statistically speaking, though I have not seen the raw numbers myself.

You are about right with your assessment. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, Teddy B said:

This may be the most silly argument against DACA I've seen. Yes, let's take 18 year old children who know no other life than the one they have in the USA and hold them responsible for not deporting themselves away from their family and friends to a country they've never really lived in, simply because their parents brought them here. Ridiculous at best.

Technically, said 18 year old would have come here at the age of 8.  While said youngster may not have had a choice in the matter, there is little doubt in my mind that they didn't know at the time, or come to realize soon after, that they were living in a place they were not supposed to.  Have been knowing it for about 10 years now.  Also old enough to remember where their original home was, though they may have zero desire to return.  (Then again, I am sure for some, their life here is not much better than their life back in the homeland, though that is purely conjecture on my part).

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

11 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

13 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

why me? and what does my opinion on immigration have to do with sessions rescinding daca? seems to me like conservatives/trump supporters always want to point the finger and scream "YOU WANT OPEN BORDERS" so the convo gets completely shut down. sorry, but i'm not interested.

explain it to me like i'm five. i'm really shy about sharing my opinions, see.

Because you're one of the ones on here who have stated "we need immigration reform". So I am clearly asking and wanting to honestly know what immigration reform you are asking for? I am not being flippant I am just asking so I can know exactly where you stand and not guess. 

 

No criticism from me just asking. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, Teddy B said:

It also doesn't change the fact that your line of reasoning is tragically flawed, but please continue.

I would like to hear how it's "tragically flawed".  I can see what he means, just as I can see why it's inhumane to deport the kids.  But I'd like to hear your slant on how his opinion is wrong, please.

[Mrs. Wild 87]

2 minutes ago, cyberfx1024 said:

We restrict Mexican Laborers to come here???? First time I have heard of that. Actually last I heard they additional spots for that visa to allow MORE people to come under the H2A visa. So don't come at me with that BS, because google is my BFF. Also if they are restricting people coming under seasonal work visas then how did my neice get one and is here in the USA now working? 

http://modernfarmer.com/2017/05/h-2a-visa-temporary-foreign-farm-workers-on-the-rise/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/07/17/trump-officials-order-15000-new-visas-for-low-wage-workers/?utm_term=.d28ef531b7b4

 

You think I haven't seen a 3rd world country???? Sister, I used to live in the Middle East and I have been around the whole ME region. My wife is from one of the poorest, war torn island, and province in the Philippines, she grew up literally "Dirt Floor Poor", and I happily lived there with her and her family.with no problems at all. So don't come at me with some holier than thou BS because that ain't flying with me at all. 

 

So what problem did we cause worldwide that we are closing our doors to now?

Yea... The govt immediately realized how screwed we are when we restrict the agricultural worker programs. That's what I'm saying... restriction of programs like that is one of the reasons we have 11mil illegally present people. Please Google a bit more, states invidially have tossed around the idea of cleaning house with these laborers. It doesn't benefit anyone.

 

Not knowing your story, I do not know your circumstances. And I am very glad both you and your wife are here, hopefully in better conditions than in the past. It does strike me as hypocritical that you would want to shut the door on those behind you though. We currently have a very biased way of processing those coming from MENA countries, if we let them in at all. As for your last question... you said Google was your bff, use it. What problems did we help cause and now are shutting our doors to? Google "Syrian refugees".

 

 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, smilesammich said:

doesn't change the FACT that daca was created to give immigrants who fit the 'no fault of their own' criteria a way to stay. "welcome them with open arms" sure, buddy. 

How so?  By filing a new I-751 every two years for the rest of their life?  They are out of status by current immigration law, DACA notwithstanding.  Had the laws been amended to allow them to stay (actual amnesty), then I would agree with you.  All DACA did was offer false hope, from my point of view.  It was never a means to an end.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

4 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

Technically, said 18 year old would have come here at the age of 8.  While said youngster may not have had a choice in the matter, there is little doubt in my mind that they didn't know at the time, or come to realize soon after, that they were living in a place they were not supposed to.  Have been knowing it for about 10 years now.  Also old enough to remember where their original home was, though they may have zero desire to return.  (Then again, I am sure for some, their life here is not much better than their life back in the homeland, though that is purely conjecture on my part).

You are totally right in your assessment I think. I read an article about 1-2 years back from the LA Times or something Liberal rag that was talking about the Central American Immigrant wave and how we needed to accept them because they were escaping gang violence and killings. All the while it lead me in and made me feel bad for this woman and her son, and how I really wanted them to stay here for that reason. At the end of the article it stated that had moved in with family they had here in San Bernardino, California. Which if you don't know is one of the most crime and gang ridden murder capitols of California, if not the USA. So basically she took her son from the frying pan and into a fire, and totally disgusted me. 

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, cyberfx1024 said:

Because you're one of the ones on here who have stated "we need immigration reform". So I am clearly asking and wanting to honestly know what immigration reform you are asking for? I am not being flippant I am just asking so I can know exactly where you stand and not guess. 

 

No criticism from me just asking. 

i think anyone who has been through the process understands that we need immigration reform. we need more legal avenues for people that want to come here, bring their families and build a good life. i believe immigrants add to our country, not take away. and i don't much care for just looking to accept the 'brightest and best'same as i don't believe in only the 'brightest and the best' being the only citizens permitted to reproduce. 

as always, corruption within immigration starts at the very top - with the untouchable businesses who hire cheap labor and suffer no consequences. instead of deporting, we should be going after the people who have been paying for cheap labor and profiting off of poor 'illegals'. i certainly don't believe that anyone brought here as a child should be deported or punished for their parents actions. if their parents have been here making a productive life under the radar - i see no need to deport them. i think that us citizens/corporations/businesses should be allowed to 'sponsor' the immigration of anyone of their choosing, not just spouses..so long as that person is not a criminal threat.

and i think the raise act is utter garbage, if you couldn't figure that out from my opinions above.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

It could be seen as more of a slam towards your wife's culture than actually funny.  To some, I suppose.

 

1 hour ago, Teddy B said:

The new sheriff doesn't like fun, or compassion. Strictly business here, please leave your shoes at the door.

 

1 hour ago, jayjayj said:

Your jokes are amazingly funny!  

 

[smilesammich 10,727]

5 minutes ago, IDWAF said:

How so?  By filing a new I-751 every two years for the rest of their life?  They are out of status by current immigration law, DACA notwithstanding.  Had the laws been amended to allow them to stay (actual amnesty), then I would agree with you.  All DACA did was offer false hope, from my point of view.  It was never a means to an end.

i get it, it's about obama. uninteresting.

Just now, IDWAF said:

It could be seen as more of a slam towards your wife's culture than actually funny.  To some, I suppose.

 

 

 

trying too hard. totally white here, always take my shoes off at the door.

[Dashinka 24,109]

24 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

and here we go..

explain it to me like i'm five. i'm really shy about sharing my opinions, see.

So how do you fix it if Congress will not act?  I actually agree with you that most likely Congress will not act, wasn't the Dreamer act blocked several times by both sides?

[smilesammich 10,727]

8 minutes ago, Mrs. Wild said:

Google "Syrian refugees".

 

 

exactly.

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

So how do you fix it if Congress will not act?  I actually agree with you that most likely Congress will not act, wasn't the Dreamer act blocked several times by both sides?

politics is politics, immigration is a hot one. you know that.

[jayjayj 571]

4 minutes ago, Mrs. Wild said:

Yea... The govt immediately realized how screwed we are when we restrict the agricultural worker programs. That's what I'm saying... restriction of programs like that is one of the reasons we have 11mil illegally present people. Please Google a bit more, states invidially have tossed around the idea of cleaning house with these laborers. It doesn't benefit anyone.

 

Not knowing your story, I do not know your circumstances. And I am very glad both you and your wife are here, hopefully in better conditions than in the past. It does strike me as hypocritical that you would want to shut the door on those behind you though. We currently have a very biased way of processing those coming from MENA countries, if we let them in at all. As for your last question... you said Google was your bff, use it. What problems did we help cause and now are shutting our doors to? Google "Syrian refugees".

 

 

Did we direct the Syrian President to use chemical weapons on his own people? No, but then we must have ordered ISIS to invade northern Syria? No, then we definitely must have forced Russia to bomb innocent Syrians?

 

If restrictive policies cause people to do the exact thing the restrictive policy is prohibiting, then why make any restrictive policies?  Are you saying then that if we let anyone in, no one will come in?

[Dashinka 24,109]

1 minute ago, smilesammich said:

exactly.

politics is politics, immigration is a hot one. you know that.

Yes it is, probably one of the biggest reasons Trump was elected, but we still have to follow our rules regardless.