Trump signs memo preventing illegal immigrants from being counted in congressional redistricting

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

Any notion that illegals dictate the "representation" of American citizens is an affront to the republic itself. Shouldn't be counted. The law and letter dictate they be removed not represented. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

2 hours ago, yuna628 said:

Hyperbole man. Look, Libertarians and Originalists know that what the administration is trying to do just isn't the way it's supposed to be. And if we want it to be a different way, changes have to come from Congress. The founders understood how matters with immigration were supposed to be, and that is vastly different to the current way some think on it now (on both sides). The text was written specifically this way for a reason. It may be upsetting for some, but the administration is going to lose this argument.

It's not hyperbole.  The left of which I speak wants open borders and many USC rights for illegals.  I know you have to see this.  If a true libertarian could bust into the establishment, it might benefit us all, and I have no issue with giving that a try, as both dems and pubs have failed to fix our broken immigration system.

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,386]

3 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

It's not hyperbole.  The left of which I speak wants open borders and many USC rights for illegals.  I know you have to see this.  If a true libertarian could bust into the establishment, it might benefit us all, and I have no issue with giving that a try, as both dems and pubs have failed to fix our broken immigration system.

Libertarians are far flung open border wing nuts. That is why I stopped voting for them 

Edited July 22, 2020 by Nature Boy 2.0

[yuna628 9,755]

8 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

It's not hyperbole.  The left of which I speak wants open borders and many USC rights for illegals.  I know you have to see this.  If a true libertarian could bust into the establishment, it might benefit us all, and I have no issue with giving that a try, as both dems and pubs have failed to fix our broken immigration system.

But would you be comfortable on many Libertarian's ideals about immigration? Most likely you wouldn't. We are all over the map, but some are very radical on border issues while others do believe in borders but would like to change immigration vastly differently to the point I don't think many here would be comfortable.

 

When it comes to the hyperbole thing... man I've been hearing that ''liberals" are going to destroy this country since I was born, and I'm pretty sure they said it even before I was born and they'll still keep it up after we're both gone. It's a broken record with a lot of fear involved, and you know what? When republicans then get in charge, all those screaming about ''liberals'' destroying tend to overlook the other kind of destroying going on by the other side. Erosion of rights and liberties goes both ways, and they both take advantage of it.

Edited July 22, 2020 by yuna628

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

But would you be comfortable on many Libertarian's ideals about immigration? Most likely you wouldn't. We are all over the map, but some are very radical on border issues while others do believe in borders but would like to change immigration vastly differently to the point I don't think many here would be comfortable.

I'm only close with a handful of libertarians, and three of them have foreign spouses, and all of them are against illegals in America and open borders.  They went thru the legal process, and expect that others should as well.  Kind of like me.

[yuna628 9,755]

7 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

I'm only close with a handful of libertarians, and three of them have foreign spouses, and all of them are against illegals in America and open borders.  They went thru the legal process, and expect that others should as well.  Kind of like me.

We do vary all over the place, and that may be one good thing is that we value the differences of opinions, but this does not always make a cohesive platform to run on. I'd say the main party line believes in some limits, but is still vastly different way of thinking than how we look at immigration today. We went through the legal process, but I do not wish that process on anyone. It's a mess.. and we all know that.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

22 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

We do vary all over the place, and that may be one good thing is that we value the differences of opinions, but this does not always make a cohesive platform to run on. I'd say the main party line believes in some limits, but is still vastly different way of thinking than how we look at immigration today. We went through the legal process, but I do not wish that process on anyone. It's a mess.. and we all know that.

Sure it's a mess.  Has been for decades.  But does your experience cause you to want open borders?  I know mine doesn't.  

[yuna628 9,755]

Just now, Voice of Reason said:

Sure it's a mess.  Has been for decades.  But does your experience cause you to want open borders?  I know mine doesn't.  

Not open borders, but I do think it should be a lot easier for everyone involved. I'm less restrictionist though (certainly not nationalist) and would like to see more immigration options but better vetting. I'd like to see harsh penalties on those employers that hire those illegally and basically use people for slave labor. For other immigration issues I haven't quite arrived at what the best solution should be, on the one hand my views is not too different from those at CATO for instance, though even there they paint too broad a brush. I am appreciative that this country gave me the option to bring my husband here, unlike a different set of nonsense policies and problems his immigration system creates. But I am also aware that how most of our ancestors got here, and how the founders considered liberty and immigration as very different than the variety of positions we have today. That may surprise some and outrage others, though I think we can all agree it needs fixing.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

7 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Not open borders, but I do think it should be a lot easier for everyone involved. I'm less restrictionist though (certainly not nationalist) and would like to see more immigration options but better vetting. I'd like to see harsh penalties on those employers that hire those illegally and basically use people for slave labor. For other immigration issues I haven't quite arrived at what the best solution should be, on the one hand my views is not too different from those at CATO for instance, though even there they paint too broad a brush. I am appreciative that this country gave me the option to bring my husband here, unlike a different set of nonsense policies and problems his immigration system creates. But I am also aware that how most of our ancestors got here, and how the founders considered liberty and immigration as very different than the variety of positions we have today. That may surprise some and outrage others, though I think we can all agree it needs fixing.

I agree with most of that.  I think it should cost more (a secret security investigation here in the US costs about $433.  Now imagine doing that across country borders) and the vetting process needs to be more thorough.  The time overall needs to be adjusted in some instances.  Why does it take less than a year for some, and several years for others for example.  

 

Can't compare today, with a country that is filling up, with what our ancestors faced with a wide-open continent.  

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,386]

4 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

I agree with most of that.  I think it should cost more (a secret security investigation here in the US costs about $433.  Now imagine doing that across country borders) and the vetting process needs to be more thorough.  The time overall needs to be adjusted in some instances.  Why does it take less than a year for some, and several years for others for example.  

 

Can't compare today, with a country that is filling up, with what our ancestors faced with a wide-open continent.  

Not to mention all the free stuff at taxpayer expense . Past immigrants came in legally, learned the language, assimilated and worked their tails off

[TBoneTX 46,379]

5 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Past immigrants came in legally, learned the language, assimilated and worked their tails off

Obviously an outcome of racism and bigotry!  Need to riot and tear down statues!

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

There's no inherent nationalism (in a general sense) against more or less legal immigration. The key point is legal. Being a nationalist is caricatured nowadays by globalists to try and make their views seem normal, but the very belief in the nation state starting with the sovereignty of their nation, from borders to rules, is nationalism. The idea that libertarianism is incompatible with nationalism tends to be perpetrated by people contradicting their own views and putting forth revisionism about what the status quo for trade is and has been since nations first existed. 

[laylalex 7,300]

2 hours ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Not to mention all the free stuff at taxpayer expense . Past immigrants came in legally, learned the language, assimilated and worked their tails off

Are you saying that people who are undocumented don't learn the language, assimilate and work their tails off? That is not my experience out here. I grew up with people whose parents were (and may still be, I have no idea) undocumented, and their parents learned English, became part of the community and worked hard. Very hard. They wanted their kids to live the American Dream, just like most parents here do. That's painting millions of people with an awfully broad brush, Nature Boy. 

[Nature Boy 2.0 8,386]

3 minutes ago, laylalex said:

Are you saying that people who are undocumented don't learn the language, assimilate and work their tails off? That is not my experience out here. I grew up with people whose parents were (and may still be, I have no idea) undocumented, and their parents learned English, became part of the community and worked hard. Very hard. They wanted their kids to live the American Dream, just like most parents here do. That's painting millions of people with an awfully broad brush, Nature Boy. 

Well I am sure some of them are good people.

[laylalex 7,300]

7 minutes ago, Nature Boy 2.0 said:

Well I am sure some of them are good people.

Most of them are. That's sort of the way the world is.  Most people ARE good and want to do right by themselves, their families and their communities. This is not to say I support open borders or anything, because I do not, and I think I've been clear about that. But to assume everyone or even the majority of people who are here who are undocumented are hiving themselves off from American society, refusing to learn English, and lolling about in the sun all day without working their butts off is to assume that most people are leeches. 

 

This country is full of good people of every color and religion and philosophy and nationality and on and on and on. There are also plenty of horrible and mediocre people in all of those categories. But think of your own life, and the people you interact with. Most of them are good, even if they make mistakes and are selfish and horrible and let you down from time to time. You and I are individuals, but we're also part of a greater society. America. And this is a good place at its heart, because it's made up of good people. My dad and I may disagree on politics, but he's a deeply moral person whom I respect. Even horrible old Voldy, who treated me like trash, isn't a completely terrible person. I don't even think Trump is rotten through and through; I truly believe he loves his family. (Or most of them, sorry Tiffany. )

 

I prefer to work from the assumption that most people are good. It may be optimistic, and I may be let down more than I like. And there are plenty of bad people out there. But there's nothing out there to say that undocumented people are more lazy or less likely to integrate than those who come here legally. I judge people by who they are as individuals, not by whatever class I want to sort them into.