Illegal Border Crossings Surge

[Darth Wedgius]

A wall, patrols, rapid deportations without a hearing to anyone in the country illegally, and denial of government aid services to illegal aliens would, I think, have a positive effect.

Rapid deportations with without hearing sounds like a good way to carry out an ethnic cleansing on Latino populations.

Does the Latino population all illegally cross the border? That hasn't been in the news.

If there's not a hearing, there isn't a way to confirm that you've really got an immigrant period, and it's very easy to get rid of "Undesireables". It would not be the first mass-deportation of native-born brown people in the USA's history.

If people are rounded up illegally crossing the border, then citizens illegally crossing the border could be deported. I'm OK with that - they can come through the gates next time.

You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that people got rounded up while trying to cross the border the other way. I'm saying that citizens who grew up in this country going about their normal lives were rounded up and "repatriated" to mexico by force and without due process.

Then you aren't talking about what I was talking about. I was talking about deportation of people caught sneaking over the border, without a hearing. What people did in the past wasn't something I was talking about.

[LittleRaven]

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/ar ... ch/583252/

I actually like this piece quite a bit. But then, of course I would. David Frum is like the stereotypical NPR conservative.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

A wall, patrols, rapid deportations without a hearing to anyone in the country illegally, and denial of government aid services to illegal aliens would, I think, have a positive effect.

Rapid deportations with without hearing sounds like a good way to carry out an ethnic cleansing on Latino populations.

Does the Latino population all illegally cross the border? That hasn't been in the news.

If there's not a hearing, there isn't a way to confirm that you've really got an immigrant period, and it's very easy to get rid of "Undesireables". It would not be the first mass-deportation of native-born brown people in the USA's history.

If people are rounded up illegally crossing the border, then citizens illegally crossing the border could be deported. I'm OK with that - they can come through the gates next time.

You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that people got rounded up while trying to cross the border the other way. I'm saying that citizens who grew up in this country going about their normal lives were rounded up and "repatriated" to mexico by force and without due process.

Then you aren't talking about what I was talking about. I was talking about deportation of people caught sneaking over the border, without a hearing. What people did in the past wasn't something I was talking about.

The point is, tiresome as you may find it an expensive as it may be, things like hearings are necessary to prevent (or at least reduce) abuse of deportation powers and miscarriages of justice.

[Darth Wedgius]

A wall, patrols, rapid deportations without a hearing to anyone in the country illegally, and denial of government aid services to illegal aliens would, I think, have a positive effect.

Rapid deportations with without hearing sounds like a good way to carry out an ethnic cleansing on Latino populations.

Does the Latino population all illegally cross the border? That hasn't been in the news.

If there's not a hearing, there isn't a way to confirm that you've really got an immigrant period, and it's very easy to get rid of "Undesireables". It would not be the first mass-deportation of native-born brown people in the USA's history.

If people are rounded up illegally crossing the border, then citizens illegally crossing the border could be deported. I'm OK with that - they can come through the gates next time.

You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that people got rounded up while trying to cross the border the other way. I'm saying that citizens who grew up in this country going about their normal lives were rounded up and "repatriated" to mexico by force and without due process.

Then you aren't talking about what I was talking about. I was talking about deportation of people caught sneaking over the border, without a hearing. What people did in the past wasn't something I was talking about.

The point is, tiresome as you may find it an expensive as it may be, things like hearings are necessary to prevent (or at least reduce) abuse of deportation powers and miscarriages of justice.

I have to disagree. Rounding up people caught trying to sneak int o the U.S. seems a very clear-cut issue to me. While it's true that people could round up U.S. citizens in the barrio too, they could do that regardless of what's happening at the border.

[Yukaphile]

Look, here's the basic facts. This wall will kill 93 endangered species. This wall will leave a few American citizens stranded on the wrong side of the border. It also means the government will have to declare Eminent Domain and remove people, primarily white people, from their houses, which I don't support. This isn't going to save lives, it's just more "law and order" bullshit. Two states have flat-out refused to let the government do it. They will just tunnel under the border anyway. And most illegal immigration comes through ports of entry. You want a secure border, increase border security, which the Democrats offered, but Trump was all or nothing. He was just insistent on getting his damn wall that's gonna displace so many citizens and solve nothing, but looks good politically. THIS IS FACT. I can sympathize with the "you shouldn't break the law to come here" argument (but then, I also know a friend who's been waiting since 1996 to come here, but that's beside the point), but I think building a wall for these reasons when there's so little to gain and so much to lose and we're in debt is DAMN POINTLESS.

[G-Man]

Look, here's the basic facts. This wall will kill 93 endangered species. This wall will leave a few American citizens stranded on the wrong side of the border. It also means the government will have to declare Eminent Domain and remove people, primarily white people, from their houses, which I don't support. This isn't going to save lives, it's just more "law and order" bullshit. Two states have flat-out refused to let the government do it. They will just tunnel under the border anyway. And most illegal immigration comes through ports of entry.

Are you talking about visa overstayers, or about people being smuggled in? I don't know that this statistic is valid anymore given that illegal border crossings have skyrocketed in recent months.

You want a secure border, increase border security, which the Democrats offered, but Trump was all or nothing.

The problem with the Democrats is that they do not want to do the things necessary to make increased border security effective. We need to reform our asylum process, we need to allow the government to return rather than place in removal proceedings people who come from countries other than Mexico, and we need more detention space to hold people, and we need to get rid of Flores, which prohibits the government from detaining minors for more than 20 days.

Instead, in the recent budget Democrats fought to reduce the number of detention beds available, in order to force the government to "prioritize" which illegal aliens they went after (i.e. force them to ignore certain illegal aliens).

The Democrats are willing to spend more on border security, as long as that security is unable to actually stop people from coming across and getting released into the country.

Yukaphile: BUT THEY OFFERED TO SPEND MORE! A BILLION MORE! ISN'T THAT ENOUGH? DOESN'T THAT PROVE THAT THEY CARE ABOUT BORDER SECURITY?

Me: But they support policies that prevent those agents from stopping the flow of illegal aliens...

Yukaphile: BUT THEY OFFERED A BILLION DOLLARS! THEY WANTED TO HIRE MORE AGENTS! THAT'S WHAT MATTERS AND PROVES THEY ARE SERIOUS!

Me: But the agents are being handcuffed from doing their jobs....

Yukaphile: DOESN'T MATTER. WHAT MATTERS IS THAT THEY WANTED TO SPEND MONEY AND SHOULD GET CREDIT FOR THAT!

He was just insistent on getting his damn wall that's gonna displace so many citizens and solve nothing, but looks good politically. THIS IS FACT. I can sympathize with the "you shouldn't break the law to come here" argument (but then, I also know a friend who's been waiting since 1996 to come here, but that's beside the point), but I think building a wall for these reasons when there's so little to gain and so much to lose and we're in debt is DAMN POINTLESS.

It's not really about the wall. It's that the Democrats refuse to acknowledge that there is a crisis on the southern border and refuse to offer any constructive solutions on how to secure it. If they were offering reforms that would fix the problem I would be okay with it. But the only immigration policies they are interested in is amnesty for "DREAMers," and finding ways to expand catch-and-release. And they time and again tell us that there is no crisis on the border, or use data from 2017 to tell us that border crossings are at a decades-long low (ignoring the skyrocketing crossings in the last few months), or lie and tell us that the caravan that trashed Tijuana in November and December was a figment of Trumps imagination.

The Democrats want open borders because they want to import new voters. And they do not care how it affects current Americans.

If the Democrats were willing to acknowledge the border crisis and to seriously discuss ways to solve it, I would be okay with their opposition to the wall. But the fact of the matter is, they are offering nothing to stop the crisis and seem to want it to continue and get worse.

[Draco Dracul]

It's not really about the wall. It's that the Democrats refuse to acknowledge that there is a crisis on the southern border and refuse to offer any constructive solutions on how to secure it. If they were offering reforms that would fix the problem I would be okay with it. But the only immigration policies they are interested in is amnesty for "DREAMers," and finding ways to expand catch-and-release. And they time and again tell us that there is no crisis on the border, or use data from 2017 to tell us that border crossings are at a decades-long low (ignoring the skyrocketing crossings in the last few months), or lie and tell us that the caravan that trashed Tijuana in November and December was a figment of Trumps imagination.

The Democrats want open borders because they want to import new voters. And they do not care how it affects current Americans.

If the Democrats were willing to acknowledge the border crisis and to seriously discuss ways to solve it, I would be okay with their opposition to the wall. But the fact of the matter is, they are offering nothing to stop the crisis and seem to want it to continue and get worse.

We've been willing to do so for over a decade, but any compromise is going to have to give us something we want. And that's going to mean at minimum DREAM, and likely some increase in legal immigration. If y'all cared about securing the boarder so much maybe y'all shouldn't have let the TEA party kill the gang of eight deal. Or maybe you should have focused on that when you actually controlled the House rather than trying to steal people's healthcare or cutting a check to the rich.

[G-Man]

It's not really about the wall. It's that the Democrats refuse to acknowledge that there is a crisis on the southern border and refuse to offer any constructive solutions on how to secure it. If they were offering reforms that would fix the problem I would be okay with it. But the only immigration policies they are interested in is amnesty for "DREAMers," and finding ways to expand catch-and-release. And they time and again tell us that there is no crisis on the border, or use data from 2017 to tell us that border crossings are at a decades-long low (ignoring the skyrocketing crossings in the last few months), or lie and tell us that the caravan that trashed Tijuana in November and December was a figment of Trumps imagination.

The Democrats want open borders because they want to import new voters. And they do not care how it affects current Americans.

If the Democrats were willing to acknowledge the border crisis and to seriously discuss ways to solve it, I would be okay with their opposition to the wall. But the fact of the matter is, they are offering nothing to stop the crisis and seem to want it to continue and get worse.

We've been willing to do so for over a decade, but any compromise is going to have to give us something we want.

Thank you for admitting that you see border security as a concession, not as the duty of the government. Sort of proves that the Democrats lack loyalty to America and do not care about border security. We keep hearing about how the GOP should "put country over party" by "standing up to Trump," but in their eagerness to import the third world in order to being in more Democrat voters, it's really the Democrats who are putting the party's interests over the nations'.

Besides, we already made that compromise in 1986. We expect the border security we were already promised before making another deal.

And that's going to mean at minimum DREAM, and likely some increase in legal immigration.

So you are holding the border hostage to amnesty, and to finding an alternative way to flood the country with Democratic voters.

Again, this shows that the Democrats hate the country, and do not really care about border security.

If you see a border crisis, and your first thought is to use this as leverage to get a policy (effectively threatening to allow an invasion if you don't get your way) it is obvious that you see America as your enemy, or at least as your hostage, not as your country.

If y'all cared about securing the boarder so much maybe y'all shouldn't have let the TEA party kill the gang of eight deal. Or maybe you should have focused on that when you actually controlled the House rather than trying to steal people's healthcare or cutting a check to the rich.

There is no reason to believe that the Gang of Eight deal would have led to better border security. The security measures were to happen after the amnesty, so there is no reason to believe that those measures would not be stopped as soon as the illegal aliens were given legal status. And we should not have to accept vastly increased legal immigration and mass amnesty as the price for the government DOING ITS JOB.

And yes, I agree that Trump should have focused on his immigration agenda when the GOP controlled the House. That was far more important than Obamacare repeal or the tax cut. Problem is, a lot of the Republicans are not loyal to the country either.

[Draco Dracul]

It's not really about the wall. It's that the Democrats refuse to acknowledge that there is a crisis on the southern border and refuse to offer any constructive solutions on how to secure it. If they were offering reforms that would fix the problem I would be okay with it. But the only immigration policies they are interested in is amnesty for "DREAMers," and finding ways to expand catch-and-release. And they time and again tell us that there is no crisis on the border, or use data from 2017 to tell us that border crossings are at a decades-long low (ignoring the skyrocketing crossings in the last few months), or lie and tell us that the caravan that trashed Tijuana in November and December was a figment of Trumps imagination.

The Democrats want open borders because they want to import new voters. And they do not care how it affects current Americans.

If the Democrats were willing to acknowledge the border crisis and to seriously discuss ways to solve it, I would be okay with their opposition to the wall. But the fact of the matter is, they are offering nothing to stop the crisis and seem to want it to continue and get worse.

We've been willing to do so for over a decade, but any compromise is going to have to give us something we want.

Thank you for admitting that you see border security as a concession, not as the duty of the government. Sort of proves that the Democrats lack loyalty to America and do not care about border security. We keep hearing about how the GOP should "put country over party" by "standing up to Trump," but in their eagerness to import the third world in order to being in more Democrat voters, it's really the Democrats who are putting the party's interests over the nations'.

Besides, we already made that compromise in 1986. We expect the border security we were already promised before making another deal.

And that's going to mean at minimum DREAM, and likely some increase in legal immigration.

So you are holding the border hostage to amnesty, and to finding an alternative way to flood the country with Democratic voters.

Again, this shows that the Democrats hate the country, and do not really care about border security.

If you see a border crisis, and your first thought is to use this as leverage to get a policy (effectively threatening to allow an invasion if you don't get your way) it is obvious that you see America as your enemy, or at least as your hostage, not as your country.

You see border crossings as a security crisis, I see the continued existence of an exploitable underclass, especially with those that had no choice in coming here, to be a humanitarian crisis. The fact that the US has played such a large part in destabilizing South and Central America makes me sympathetic to them especially when statistically immigrants, including undocumented and removal immigrants commit crime at a lower rate than US citizens. I'm willing to shell out for more security, but only hand in hand with alleviating the crisis our foreign policies has had a huge hand in creating.

Additionally the primary reason that the often socially conservative, and very religious Latino community breaks in favor of the democrats is that the GOP has a core group that is deeply racist due to absorbing the the anti-black and anti-immigrant Dixiecrats as part of the southern strategy.

If y'all cared about securing the boarder so much maybe y'all shouldn't have let the TEA party kill the gang of eight deal. Or maybe you should have focused on that when you actually controlled the House rather than trying to steal people's healthcare or cutting a check to the rich.

There is no reason to believe that the Gang of Eight deal would have led to better border security. The security measures were to happen after the amnesty, so there is no reason to believe that those measures would not be stopped as soon as the illegal aliens were given legal status. And we should not have to accept vastly increased legal immigration and mass amnesty as the price for the government DOING ITS JOB.

And yes, I agree that Trump should have focused on his immigration agenda when the GOP controlled the House. That was far more important than Obamacare repeal or the tax cut. Problem is, a lot of the Republicans are not loyal to the country either.

There is plenty of reason to believe that, namely that the GOP had the House, and would go on to reclaim the senate within two years. Unless you're saying that the GOP doesn't really care about boarder security and would turn it's back on it immediately.

As I was told many times during the Obama years, the government is built to work on compromise so if boarder security is important to the Republicans they need to find something to trade for it.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

a lot of the Republicans are not loyal to the country either

Yeah and President 80s Movie Villain is the most disloyal of all