Ben Shapiro has a great explanation for this highlighting the extremes in both parties... basically, the Dems have ZERO incentive to actually "save DACA" or "help the Dreamers" because they can just blame Trump/Repubs and keep calling them racist. This plan went far beyond what DACA did and it's STILL not enough for the Dems. They have said and still say "stop trump" and "fight against ANYTHING he proposes." At the same time, Republicans are freaking out that he's "caved" as a starting negotiation point, which is strange because that presumes that the Dems actually would negotiate. Which they have zero incentive to do.

Seriously, look at Ben Shapiro's podcast or Daily Wire articles about this. Totally spot-on for this issue.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/26376/...

Political correctness needs to die a quick death in the USA. Hire the director of Immigration in Australis or Canada to run our Immigration system.

Same with Canada. I looked up what I would have to do to immigrate to Canade. As I remember, I would need to invest $500k in Canada (in some way) to be considered. I have graduate degrees from MIT, have run several businesses in the USA, and can support myself. But trying to get residency in Canada? Forget it.

Let the dreamers try Canada

Watch Canadian border security on netflix to see what happens in Canada. None of this "dreamer" crap gets you anywhere there, and it shouldnt get them anywhere here either.

They are whining. there is a path to citizenship for anyone wanting to come to the USA. Its been there for a LONG time, and the illegals got a free ride so far. Its over and they should apply. Pick the good ones and let them get green cards; the rest go OUT

I dont know if you have time to individually assess all 800,000 of them, but I dont. I say to let them apply as immigrants and let the bureaucracy analyze each one. might take years, but so what.

I'm from a second generation European immigrant family. I know the my grandparents story of coming to the USA and what they did to become citizens. In a particular situation one of them had to go to school to learn the English language.
Here in Arizona there are many Hispanics that live here and don't know any English. This makes me angry as hell. Part of the immigration reform is that all these illegals and others that don't speak the language be sent back to where they came from.

Yes. The rate of incarceration of illegals - especially repeat offenders - should give anyone pause when considering their potential entry into US society.

Actually, there is a line. It is composed of those who have gone through the proper channels of paperwork and applications and are waiting their turn for a hearing. Those who are here illegally need to join that line, submit their applications, and wait. There's nothing biased about this. Bias would be introduced by giving current illegals special treatment allowing them to circumvent the process used by everyone else. That's what I take issue with.

As to the argument about context, what contextual reading in immigration law puts precedence on illegals already here? I can't find any. To be objective, the law must apply equally to everyone - not pick and choose special cases for exemption/special treatment. THAT is what context is - it applies to the LAW and not the subject. Very different.

Example: the context of the Second Amendment. It is clear from the writings at the time that the Founding Fathers understood that the right to self-defense applied to every American individually and that no government infringement on that right was acceptable. The context applicable revolves around the necessity of a militia, which properly understood reinforces the individual right to bear arms. But the context of the law entirely deals with the ability to resist repression by tyrannical government. It doesn't grant special privileges to those who identify with any respective militia, however.

Great points. Again we mostly agree.
Is a $1 Million TAX too high (per Illegal?) :-)

have a good night!

Imagine a country that let illegals in, then let them vote. Did this for generations... And it changed the face of the country. It made it less safe, and drained it. It brought people who DONT want to assimilate but want us to bend to their will...

And then I realize it started before I was born, and we fix it now, or we lay America to rest. because it cannot be the same country with the values that are being shoved upon us from all directions.

Government is NOT the solution, it IS the problem!

We agree...

Yes Captn!
" the LEFT has CONFLATED Illegals with Immigrants "
The question is- Is the problem from mussy progressivsta emoting, or the cold intention to destroy?
Answer- Same difference (as we say here).

My point in my earlier post is that legal migrants are ok, the data suggest they are beneficial.
Data on illegals tells us the opposite.
When a nation does not allow itself the right to select there will be short term and long term disaster.

I agree with much of what you are saying. As I see it, appropriate ways to deter future people coming here illegally would include (1) greatly tightening border security, (2) requiring proof of legal residency to obtain any government benefits, and (3) requiring their countries of origin (through tariffs or other means) to pay for our trouble and expense in arresting and deporting their citizens who came here illegally. And any illegal immigrant found to be “gaming our kindness” by committing other crimes should be prosecuted and sentenced to the full extent of the law, with expenses and restitution billed to their countries of origin in the same manner as (3) above.

Regarding illegal immigrants brought here as children, and who have committed no other crimes, I do not consider it “special treatment” to establish separate criteria to deal with this group, since its members differ in many important respects from other illegals who knowingly and voluntarily broke the law by crossing the border.

As I said earlier on this topic, there is no way to untangle the current immigration mess in a way that would be “fair” to everyone. However, it would be manifestly unfair and in no one’s self-interest to deport all illegal immigrants that were brought here as children. Objective standards should be put in place to evaluate each person’s application for residency and/or citizenship, based on his or her character, respect for other people’s lives and property, and knowledge of and adherence to the principles of individual liberty. It would perhaps be appropriate to offset the advantages they obtained by being here already, by imposing a more stringent set of requirements on this group of immigrants than on those going through the normal immigration process.

You’re talking about the defects of the situation as it exists now. I’m discussing ways we might rectify this situation if we had the means to do so. There is no way to untangle the current immigration mess in a way that would be “fair” to everyone. However, it would be manifestly unfair and in no one’s self-interest to deport all illegal immigrants that were brought here as children. Objective standards would have to be put in place to evaluate each person’s application for residency and/or citizenship, based on his or her character, respect for other people’s lives and property, and knowledge of and adherence to the principles of individual liberty. It would perhaps be appropriate to offset the advantages they obtained by being here already, by imposing a more stringent set of requirements on this group of immigrants than on those going through the normal immigration process.

Fox New actually ran the numbers a while back. And John Lott has crunched the numbers for a couple of Sanctuary cities. They DO Commit more crime. More often.

NON-CITIZEN Federal Crime Rates of ILLEGALS:
22% of Murders
18% of Fraud
33% of Money Laundering
29% of Drug Trafficking
72% of Drug Possession

Now, this is for a group of EITHER 10 Million or 30 Million (depending on who is asking).
at 30 Million (the larger number. They would make up ~10% of our population)
Making them 2 times more likely to murder (if you use 10 Million and 3% it is 6 Times more likely of Murder)

But look at drug Possession... Probably how they are making their living. 72% when you make up 10%
that makes them 7 Times more likely to be possessing drugs.

Bear in mind, that the LEFT has CONFLATED Illegals with Immigrants (on purpose, and then quotes how IMMIGRANTS commit less crime, which EXCLUDES the illegals, but lets them wax philosophically about how great these people are, so we should shut up).

Remember the phrase "If it saves JUST ONE LIFE"... Well stopping Illegal Immigration would CERTAINLY Save one life! Probably one per day!

A friend of mine was nearly killed by a driver who was here illegally, without a license or insurance. And because my friend did not have Uninsured Motorists Insurance, he got screwed over pretty good. And of course the illegal just disappeared.

They crime rates are much higher... They aren't trying to work at banks, and places that care so much about their background!

I concede my argument was not the same...

What else can the government DO, while upholding ALL OF Our Existing laws?

You are asking that they be treated special.

And what does that do to DETER future people coming?

They are LITERALLY Gaming our kindness, our natural tendency to be giving... In order to come here illegally and break our laws at rates WAY HIGHER than normal citizens.

Your analogy is invalid. It equates being in the country unlawfully with robbery and kidnapping, which are much more serious offenses involving the direct initiation of force. Government action needs to be proportionate to the nature and severity of the transgression and the extent to which the person involved is responsible for it. For example, it is not fair or just to impose a life sentence on someone for stealing a candy bar. This does not mean that the so-called “dreamers” are entitled to a free pass, but unless they have committed other crimes there are plenty of alternatives the government can pursue other than deportation.

The "back of the line" is usually intended to be metaphorical -- not a line of people extending out over a dock or airport. It refers to the requirement to go back to the beginning and follow all the required procedures -- except that in addition there are also often artificial quotas creating a literal wait at the end of a bureaucratic "line".

Jumping the "line" may not hold someone else up but allowing it and then granting amnesty from the law in principle is an injustice to everyone else.

We also know that "citizenship" is an increasing farce. The standards, even if they can be difficult or expensive, do not address rational requirements for citizenship, and immigrants, legal or not, are increasingly granted citizenship rights and improper entitlements they are not supposed to have, such as voting, state taxpayer-funded education, social security, and outright welfare subsidies.

Context matters in applying any law or principle -- you have to identify the context for which a law is intended in order to understand if it applies and how. There are no intrinsic principles with no contextual meaning and justification. But that requires that people cannot drop context and plead exemption as they make up their own contextual meaning to pretend their illegality doesn't matter.

The "whiners" he referred to pertains to those who are petulantly demanding amnesty as an entitlement. It does not refer to all emigrants, and as an identification of behavior is not a kind of legal status of emigration. That is not how freedomforall used the term.

Do you not see this as REWARDING Bad Behavior, and therefore encouraging more?

What if I break into your house with my UNDER AGE Kid, and we take over. Keep you locked in the basement. When the police finally come save you, how would you deal with my child. Granted, I am willing to go to Jail as long as my kid gets to keep your house. They have grown accustomed to it, and it was NOT their fault...

The country is not controlled by evil business owners who want people to be dumb, uneducated and submissive and that is not the cause of the problems with education in this country. His obscene demagoguery trashing business owners is not a rational argument for anything and has nothing to do with immigration.

No serious public debate or proposals in Washington show concern for those, such as Eastern Europeans, trying to emigrate here for proper, individualist goals, but subjected to bureaucratic obstructions. Most of the public knows nothing about those problems. The links you cited are to articles with the usual collectivist "merit based" and "national or public interest", economic protectionism, and artificial discriminatory quotas. They do not address the problems with bureaucratic red tape and horrendous legal costs obstructing individualists trying to come here to further their own productive values.

They kept the amnesty and refused to fund enforcement. No "deal" of Trump's can bind future Congressional action, let alone another Obama.

Democrats do not compromise on principle. That is not "extremism", just (in their case) false and destructive principles. Calling consistency with principles "extremism" is a smear. It denounces any consistency with principle regardless of the principles, and it fails to properly reject false principles.

They compromise politically when it furthers their agenda, while Republicans, who have no principles, compromise politically with their 'me too but slower' strategy. The Democrats' "compromise" always means taking what they can get and coming back for the rest later, as Republicans help them do it in the name of compromise as an end in itself for politicians.