Democrat Immigration Hypocrisy

[G-Man]

Democrats keep telling us that we do not need the wall because most illegal aliens are people who came legally and then overstayed their visa.

Yet, in the DHS funding bill, Democrats want to decrease the number of detention beds available, to make it harder to deport people who are already here illegally. Deportation is really the only way to stop visa overstayers, as they are already here at the point at which they become illegal.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... -plans-wo/

It's hard to take claims that "we don't need a wall because border crossing is not the problem" seriously when Democrats want to make it harder to stop what they are saying IS the problem.

[Draco Dracul]

Democrats keep telling us that we do not need the wall because most illegal aliens are people who came legally and then overstayed their visa.

Yet, in the DHS funding bill, Democrats want to decrease the number of detention beds available, to make it harder to deport people who are already here illegally. Deportation is really the only way to stop visa overstayers, as they are already here at the point at which they become illegal.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... -plans-wo/

It's hard to take claims that "we don't need a wall because border crossing is not the problem" seriously when Democrats want to make it harder to stop what they are saying IS the problem.

That's not hypocrisy. Saying the wall won't stop illegal immigration, and that hard working people who have broken no law and committed no crime should be given a path to permanent residency or even citizenship are not incompatible ideas.

[G-Man]

That's not hypocrisy. Saying the wall won't stop illegal immigration, and that hard working people who have broken no law and committed no crime should be given a path to permanent residency or even citizenship are not incompatible ideas.

If you are here illegally, you are breaking laws. If you are working illegally, you are breaking laws. Lots of identity, etc., laws are broken by illegal aliens. Many of those laws (identity theft) are criminal.

The hypocrisy is that they say that we should not worry about illegal border crossing because visa overstayers are the majority of the problem, implying that that is where we ought to focus, when they do not care about that either.

It's not the wall itself so much as the statement that the focus on border crossers is wrong when they actually do not want us to focus on visa overstayers either.

It's like saying that we should not be concerned with radon in people's homes because smoking is a much bigger cause of lung cancer, when you don't actually care about reducing smoking, either.

If they just said "we oppose more funding for DHS because we do not believe that the U.S. has the legitimate power to determine whom it lets in and lets stay - well, that would be stupid but it would at least be honest. Instead, the Democrats are trying as hard as possible to make it sound like they care about immigration enforcement while trying to hamstring it as much as possible. All because they want to import more Democrat voters.

[Draco Dracul]

That's not hypocrisy. Saying the wall won't stop illegal immigration, and that hard working people who have broken no law and committed no crime should be given a path to permanent residency or even citizenship are not incompatible ideas.

If you are here illegally, you are breaking laws. If you are working illegally, you are breaking laws. Lots of identity, etc., laws are broken by illegal aliens. Many of those laws (identity theft) are criminal.
g to hamstring it as much as possible. All because they want to import more Democrat voters.

The majority opinion of Arizona vs. United States disagrees with you, the act of being in the US without authorization or documentation is not in and of itself a crime. Also statistically immigrants both legal and illegal are less likely to commit crimes than US Citizens.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I for one hate facts. Who cares if it's valid that a wall that cost billions along with the implicit costs proceedingly piled on from the shutdown won't address the problem at all?

[TGLS]

I for one hate facts. Who cares if it's valid that a wall that cost billions along with the implicit costs proceedingly piled on from the shutdown won't address the problem at all?

I have a better idea. Why not just declare war on Mexico-- sorry declare police action on Mexico, then start delivering enough ordinance to render 50 miles south of the border uninhabitable, more or less continuously. Nobody would try to cross the border then! /sarcasm

[Robovski]

We could settle and annex large parts of Mexico as we have done in the past. It wouldn't really solve the problem as we seen before while a lot of illegals enter through Mexico, many don't come from Mexico but other countries.

Besides, glassing a 50 mile swath of Mexico is wasteful - we get a lot of produce from Mexico. The Real solution is to annex Mexico and the Central American states and set up wall at Panama.

[CmdrKing]

That’s silly, there’s already the canal in Panama. Moats just as good as a wall.

[CharlesPhipps]

It's hard to take claims that "we don't need a wall because border crossing is not the problem" seriously when Democrats want to make it harder to stop what they are saying IS the problem.

I think you miss the forest for the trees.

They shouldn't be detained.

Asylum seekers aren't in the United States illegally and shouldn't be detained. Even if they enter the border without making any attempt to apply for citizenship or not, it should be a misdemeanor. What's the reason to fear people for just walking across an invisible line?

[G-Man]

I probably should not have brought the wall into it.

Where I am calling the Democrats hypocrites is that in the arguments about the southern border, a constant refrain I hear is that we should not be so concerned about the border because "most illegal aliens are actually visa overstays."

Yet when push comes to shove, they do not actually want to do anything about the visa overstayers either.

That's not hypocrisy. Saying the wall won't stop illegal immigration, and that hard working people who have broken no law and committed no crime should be given a path to permanent residency or even citizenship are not incompatible ideas.

If you are here illegally, you are breaking laws. If you are working illegally, you are breaking laws. Lots of identity, etc., laws are broken by illegal aliens. Many of those laws (identity theft) are criminal.
g to hamstring it as much as possible. All because they want to import more Democrat voters.

The majority opinion of Arizona vs. United States disagrees with you, the act of being in the US without authorization or documentation is not in and of itself a crime. Also statistically immigrants both legal and illegal are less likely to commit crimes than US Citizens.

I did not say that being here illegally was a crime. I said that it was BREAKING A LAW. You said "who have broken no law."

I also said that illegal aliens often commit crimes (e.g. identity theft) in the service of being here illegally.

It's hard to take claims that "we don't need a wall because border crossing is not the problem" seriously when Democrats want to make it harder to stop what they are saying IS the problem.

I think you miss the forest for the trees.

They shouldn't be detained.

Asylum seekers aren't in the United States illegally and shouldn't be detained. Even if they enter the border without making any attempt to apply for citizenship or not, it should be a misdemeanor. What's the reason to fear people for just walking across an invisible line?

Actually I am talking about detaining people who have overstayed their visas. As for what is the fear, should a country not have the power to determine whom it lets in and does not let into its borders? What if a country decides to drop its entire surplus population on our doorstep?

There's a reason why typhus and tuberculosis are making a comeback.