US citizens crowdfund the border wall

[Voltron]

I'm not confusing it at all.

If you're allowed to stay BY LAW then you are LEGALLY HERE, REGARDLESS OF HOW YOU ENTERED THE COUNTRY.

If they deny your status, then YOU REMAIN AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT.

And I'm not misusing anything. I read an article calling people illegal immigrants when they're not. If they are, by all means have them deported Andrew. And when you can't, just explain to the lawyers and judges and everyone else how they're totally misunderstanding the laws wrote and uphold.

Also, the Democrats tried to make DACA permanent. Since the GOP is can't even be bothered to do run the government in the first place, why waste the time writing a piece of legislation that McConnell won't even read?

Don't act like everyone's complicit in something just because some douche bags in Congress can't be bothered to do something for the little guy. That's like burning your own house down with matches, then blaming everyone because they didn't help put out the blaze.

You don't get to blame everyone for your lack of empathy or lack of understanding.

[Andrew NDB]

Now I'm confused. Who is saying DACA approved applicants/recipients are illegal immigrants? I mean, I guess they could become an illegal immigrant again if they fail to renew their status or their renewal gets rejected (like if they're convicted of a crime in between renewals), but that's not my point. You are throwing around "Dreamers" and "DACA people" as if these are interchangeable terms. They are not. There can be Dreamers who never seek DACA (and why should they? when DACA goes away the government now knows where a bunch of illegal immigrants live) and stay illegal immigrants, or as you admit, if they're rejected.

Nobody asked, but personally I'm fine with DACA... as a one time thing, with a limited window for application and an infinite lifespan for the people who are accepted (and no, they don't get to vote and no, they don't get to sponsor their family either). After that, no more DACA. It sets a horrible precedent. You can drag your kids here and then they "win a prize" if you're sneaky enough and can successfully hide them out here long enough? No, that's not the way it should work. For the ones already here -- right now -- who have grown up to young adulthood? Sure, fine. But let's draw a line after that.

[Voltron]

As I understand it, that's your position.

From what I understand, you and I both agree on this (correct me if I'm wrong):

1. Illegal immigrants SHOULD NOT be in the United States of America.

2. Our borders are sovereign and must be and remain secure.

3. Ninja Turtles kick ass.

Where we differ, as far as I understand:

1. DACA APPROVED recipients are no different than illegal immigrants.


The article that spawned this conversation combines the two. It makes zero effort to explain that the funding and aid accessible to the DACA approved recipients is done so ONLY for those who were vetted.

It even goes on to put a disparaging light on legal immigrants.

To be clear: the issue of whether or not DACA recipients should receive welfare on behalf of US tax payers is understandably controversial. I'm not super gung-ho about paying someone else's college tuition if their future in this country is suspect.

The thing I take issue with is the vilification of immigrants in general. The "illegal" part seems to get lost in discussion, and by the end we're all at each other's throats on things we actually all agree on.

Personally, I have no problem with the whole idea of DACA. If someone brings a kid to a weird country, the child is raised in the ways and culture of THAT country, and has little to no connection with their country of origin, then it's kind a dick move to ship them back. None of this was their doing to begin with, and if they're making a solid go of being a decent part of American society, then who does it hurt if they're a productive part of our country?

[Andrew NDB]

Originally Posted by Voltron

Where we differ, as far as I understand:

1. DACA APPROVED recipients are no different than illegal immigrants.

I never said that, nor do I believe that. I mean, they're not citizens certainly, but they're no longer illegal immigrants by the letter of the law. Now, they were illegal immigrants for the entire period of time up until when and if they were approved for DACA. I think that's the distinction that we're getting wires crossed over.

To be clear: the issue of whether or not DACA recipients should receive welfare on behalf of US tax payers is understandably controversial. I'm not super gung-ho about paying someone else's college tuition if their future in this country is suspect.

I'm... OK with DACA recipients receiving welfare as would be afforded any other citizen. But only if it is agreed that DACA be a one time thing. There can't be, like, new DACA applicants forever. A one time good faith measure, I'm fine with that.

The thing I take issue with is the vilification of immigrants in general. The "illegal" part seems to get lost in discussion, and by the end we're all at each other's throats on things we actually all agree on.

Wisely spoken.

Personally, I have no problem with the whole idea of DACA. If someone brings a kid to a weird country, the child is raised in the ways and culture of THAT country, and has little to no connection with their country of origin, then it's kind a dick move to ship them back. None of this was their doing to begin with, and if they're making a solid go of being a decent part of American society, then who does it hurt if they're a productive part of our country?

No problem with that, as long as they're not a criminal or anything. But again, it can't stay like that (meaning, if we just keep accepting DACA applicants for decades), and they certainly shouldn't be allowed to sponsor their family in later on. Otherwise, look at the incentive. Sneak across the border with your kids, lay low with Uncle Ramos for a few years, and BAM... your kids can probably get DACA and you get to stay, too. Why wouldn't you leave Venezuela if you can just do that?

It seems to me that this generation today has forgotten that legal immigration even exists. There's lots of people out there who honestly seem to believe that the only way to immigrate is to sneak into a country and then hopefully get citizenship because they were crafty and sneaky enough. It's getting very strange to me. People banging signs around that say, "I STAND WITH IMMIGRANTS" and it's like... well sh**, I do, too. Of course I do, my mom immigrated here legally decades ago. And to my knowledge, there isn't one soul out there that is against legal immigration. So what are they protesting, exactly?

[Voltron]

I think legal immigration gets lost in the mix because we don't talk about it.

The way I see it, if people want to be Americans, and they're serious about it, the path should be there. As it stands, gaining that status is notoriously difficult to do. It's even difficult to get a visa for a temporary stay in the United States.

I have a lot of friends in foreign countries. They've all remarked on how difficult it is to get a working visa in the US as opposed to other countries. Australia and Canada seem to be the go-to in regards to that.

I went to a seminar about Japanese citizens going to US colleges. One presenter mentioned that Harvard has a limit of two Japanese citizens accepted every year. I was surprised at just how rigorous and strict the process is.

Originally Posted by AndrewNDB

I do, too. Of course I do, my mom immigrated here legally decades ago. And to my knowledge, there isn't one soul out there that is against legal immigration. So what are they protesting, exactly?

A lot of people understand the focus on immigration to be less about border security and more about dog whistling racists.

Again, I want to be clear: I don't believe YOU are racist, or that every person who has conservative views is a racist, or that voting Republican inherently makes you a racist.

What I want to say is that there is a segment of the population that hear's "illegal immigrants" and doesn't think "people who are illegally entering the United States." They think along racial lines, and so the message resonates with them in a totally different way.

What ends up happening is that the lunatic fringe becomes the face of the issue, and everyone gets lumped together with them.

The same thing happens on the left. We have tons of socialist policies in this country that people either don't mind or enjoy. Police and fire, schools, libraries, etc. But there's always some group of weirdos who are for some bizarre Robin Hood Bolshevik dissolution of private property.

So now if I say "we should look into giving guaranteed insurance to children", people think I'm some foaming at the mouth crystal worshiping hippie. And if you say you want stronger border security, people think you're a banjo strumming mutant from some backwater shack.

We aren't, though. But two guys having a frank but calm discussion about politics never sold newspapers. If you get some jade egg kegeling harpy and a duck dynasty clone screaming about what Jesus thinks of maps. . .well, now we've got ratings.

In reality, we probably agree on a LOT more things than we think we do.

[Andrew NDB]

Not good:

https://newyork.cbslocal.com/2019/02...laF22ap97qPDHU

[Voltron]

While the threat has not been substantiated

Wow. So you mean being a cop is dangerous? And working to stop violent gangs are dangerous? That's some hard hitting journalism right there.

I mean, are they bound by some unwritten rule to NOT be cops and gangsters after the punch out for the day? Does some MS-13 thug walk into a convenience store and have to apologize for startling the cashier?

"Oh, sorry, man! I'm not here for protection money or anything. I'm off duty today. And tomorrow we're going to go deal some drugs, so you're cool for awhile."

[Andrew NDB]

Crowdfunding efforts going forward:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/vet...-within-months

"Nobody wants the wall" is what we're being told... yet everyone with property on the southern border is volunteering their land free of charge to do so? How strange!

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Everyone? No, it just said SOME landowners on the fringes of border states. That hardly counts as "everyone". And they are just letting them build, not "volunteering" their land. And it is only about 240 miles or so that they are even funded for. Across FOUR states with a combined border around 2000 miles long. Your rhetoric is showing.

[Voltron]

Ooo! Propaganda!

No. The American people have spoken. If the Wall is built, then Trump is doing something illegal. Another crime in a very long and ever growing list.

Also, thank you to MsMarvelDuckie for pointing out the flawed argument.