Well, well, well... someone agrees with the President that there are -hole countries. Funny how that works.

Next we'll come to the realization that defending our border would be a good idea.

If we reach advanced thought levels, we'll recognize that without defensible borders, shared language, and shared culture we aren't a country at all.

Perhaps there is hope for the left when logic and facts are applied to problem solving. Any progress towards a better understanding is a positive step.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

It's not compassion to give away other people's money.

May I interpret this to mean you have no compassion for anyone fleeing a clear and present threat of death, forced gang membership, rape, and sexual exploitation of their families?

Interpret it to mean that you can't claim "compassion" by spending other people's money. That's true no matter what "good cause" you want to force others to support.

As far as your implied question, I feel sorry for the tiny percentage of illegal border crossers who fall under your description. 80% of those who request asylum are denied. Of the remaining 20%, some (I'd guess half) find a "compassionate" judge who grants asylum even though they don't need asylum. And those are just the few who actually show up at the hearing.

I feel even more sorry for the children who are dragged across 1000 miles of desert through areas populated by those gangs you speak of when they could just flee to a much closer neighboring country that actually speaks their language. But that assumes that they really need asylum rather than coming to the US to mooch off of the taxes taken from the working class (roughly half).

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Well, well, well... someone agrees with the President that there are -hole countries.  Funny how that works.

Next we'll come to the realization that defending our border would be a good idea.

If we reach advanced thought levels, we'll recognize that without defensible borders, shared language, and shared culture we aren't a country at all.

Perhaps there is hope for the left when logic and facts are applied to problem solving.  Any progress towards a better understanding is a positive step.

Technically, they only agreed that the POTUS has the authority to exclude people from specific countries, whether or not they are -holes. 

Until Trump was elected this was never even a question, but TDS runs deep in the minds of the Left, including leftist judges.

And logic (and mathematics) are racist. Didn't you know that?

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Well, well, well... someone agrees with the President that there are -hole countries.  Funny how that works.

Next we'll come to the realization that defending our border would be a good idea.

If we reach advanced thought levels, we'll recognize that without defensible borders, shared language, and shared culture we aren't a country at all.

Perhaps there is hope for the left when logic and facts are applied to problem solving.  Any progress towards a better understanding is a positive step.

Technically, they only agreed that the POTUS has the authority to exclude people from specific countries, whether or not they are -holes. 

Until Trump was elected this was never even a question, but TDS runs deep in the minds of the Left, including leftist judges.

And logic (and mathematics) are racist. Didn't you know that?

I was referring to rollerjag's rationalization for people wanting to leave, which suggested they were leaving -hole countries.

But yes - the recent SCOTUS travel ban upholding clearly illustrates what's also relevant to this thread:

https://twitter.com/carney/status/1011616168522731520

---

https://twitter.com/carney/status/1011616168522731520

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

It's not compassion to give away other people's money.

May I interpret this to mean you have no compassion for anyone fleeing a clear and present threat of death, forced gang membership, rape, and sexual exploitation of their families?

In Mexico?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I do understand it, yes, but they're still breaking the law. Knowingly. There was a time in my life I could either go hungry or steal food to eat. I had a choice to make and if I stole food then I had to be prepared to face the consequences of being caught. It's not that I don't care about the plight of these folks, they lead a much harder life than I do and I feel for them, but you can't break the law and expect to be "rewarded" with sanctuary. You do it legally the way you should and you don't have to worry about this crap. 50 years

When a parent decides the threat to his or her family's life is worth a treacherous trip to a country where they may be separated, why can't more empathy and compassion be shown by us, the people with the much more fortunate life.

It's not compassion to give away other people's money.

May I interpret this to mean you have no compassion for anyone fleeing a clear and present threat of death, forced gang membership, rape, and sexual exploitation of their families?

The overwhelming majority only seek to gain financially, and to imply that most are fleeing for the reasons you provided is misleading. And the only reason it's even as high as it is is because they're being taught what to say and tutored to trick the system.

---

May I interpret this to mean you have no compassion for anyone fleeing a clear and present threat of death, forced gang membership, rape, and sexual exploitation of their families?

In Mexico?

If you think this isn't happening to some degree you're not as informed as you think you are.

---

Well, well, well... someone agrees with the President that there are -hole countries.  Funny how that works.

Next we'll come to the realization that defending our border would be a good idea.

If we reach advanced thought levels, we'll recognize that without defensible borders, shared language, and shared culture we aren't a country at all.

Perhaps there is hope for the left when logic and facts are applied to problem solving.  Any progress towards a better understanding is a positive step.

Your thoughts are moving too fast and skipping relevant questions along the way.

Are there sh*thole countries? Maybe.  Better question: is it appropriate or helpful for the President to declare that there are sh*thole countries? Even better question: can good people come from bad countries, or are they all tainted?  Of course good, productive people can come from even the most backwards, poor, and downtrodden country.

Is defending our border a good idea? Of course.  Better question: are we already doing so adequately? Isn't the problem more one of people overstaying their visas?

Is a shared language important? Of course. Better question: are immigrants today learning English more slowly or more quickly than previous waves? They are learning English more quickly.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Well, well, well... someone agrees with the President that there are -hole countries.  Funny how that works.

Next we'll come to the realization that defending our border would be a good idea.

If we reach advanced thought levels, we'll recognize that without defensible borders, shared language, and shared culture we aren't a country at all.

Perhaps there is hope for the left when logic and facts are applied to problem solving.  Any progress towards a better understanding is a positive step.

Your thoughts are moving too fast and skipping relevant questions along the way.

Are there sh*thole countries? Maybe.  Better question: is it appropriate or helpful for the President to declare that there are sh*thole countries? No. Even better question: can good people come from bad countries, Yes or are they all tainted? No  Of course good, productive people can come from even the most backwards, poor, and downtrodden country. I agree.

Is defending our border a good idea? Of course.  Better question: are we already doing so adequately? There aren't enough border patrol agents to cover the expanse, so the answer is no. Isn't the problem more one of people overstaying their visas? Most of them don't have visas and a percentage of those who do absolutely overstay their welcome.

Is a shared language important? Of course. Better question: are immigrants today learning English more slowly or more quickly than previous waves? They are learning English more quickly.

I don't care if immigrants come here as long as they do it legally. If you're literally fleeing for your life then you need to request asylum as a refugee.

---

I do understand it, yes, but they're still breaking the law. Knowingly. There was a time in my life I could either go hungry or steal food to eat. I had a choice to make and if I stole food then I had to be prepared to face the consequences of being caught. It's not that I don't care about the plight of these folks, they lead a much harder life than I do and I feel for them, but you can't break the law and expect to be "rewarded" with sanctuary. You do it legally the way you should and you don't have to worry about this crap. 50 years

When a parent decides the threat to his or her family's life is worth a treacherous trip to a country where they may be separated, why can't more empathy and compassion be shown by us, the people with the much more fortunate life.

If they are literally fleeing for their lives then they need to seek asylum as a refugee.

---

Your thoughts are moving too fast and skipping relevant questions along the way.

Are there sh*thole countries? Maybe.  Better question: is it appropriate or helpful for the President to declare that there are sh*thole countries? No. Even better question: can good people come from bad countries, Yes or are they all tainted? No  Of course good, productive people can come from even the most backwards, poor, and downtrodden country. I agree.

Is defending our border a good idea? Of course.  Better question: are we already doing so adequately? There aren't enough border patrol agents to cover the expanse, so the answer is no. Isn't the problem more one of people overstaying their visas? Most of them don't have visas and a percentage of those who do absolutely overstay their welcome.

Is a shared language important? Of course. Better question: are immigrants today learning English more slowly or more quickly than previous waves? They are learning English more quickly.

I don't care if immigrants come here as long as they do it legally. If you're literally fleeing for your life then you need to request asylum as a refugee.

---

When a parent decides the threat to his or her family's life is worth a treacherous trip to a country where they may be separated, why can't more empathy and compassion be shown by us, the people with the much more fortunate life.

If they are literally fleeing for their lives then they need to seek asylum as a refugee.

I agree. It is important to come legally and if you qualify for refugee status, that is a form of legal immigration.
The President is also trying to reduce *legal* immigration, however.  It would seem we, you and I, care more about being a nation where laws are both realistic and enforced, while the President just flat doesn't like immigrants.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I don't care if immigrants come here as long as they do it legally. If you're literally fleeing for your life then you need to request asylum as a refugee.

---

If they are literally fleeing for their lives then they need to seek asylum as a refugee.

I agree. It is important to come legally and if you qualify for refugee status, that is a form of legal immigration.
The President is also trying to reduce *legal* immigration, however.  It would seem we, you and I, care more about being a nation where laws are both realistic and enforced, while the President just flat doesn't like immigrants.

As long as illegal immigration continues, legal immigration should lessen. You can't maintain a constant flow of legal and illegal immigrants. 

This is part of the problem with illegal immigration.

---

I agree. It is important to come legally and if you qualify for refugee status, that is a form of legal immigration.
The President is also trying to reduce *legal* immigration, however.  It would seem we, you and I, care more about being a nation where laws are both realistic and enforced, while the President just flat doesn't like immigrants.

As long as illegal immigration continues, legal immigration should lessen. You can't maintain a constant flow of legal and illegal immigrants. 

This is part of the problem with illegal immigration.

Illegal immigration has basically stopped. The rate of new people coming in illegally is about the same as the rate of illegal immigrants leaving. Most of the illegal immigrants here now arrived more than 10 years ago. If we do even more to encourage illegal immigrants to leave, like tighten up the e-verify system, we will need more legal immigrants to replace them in the workforce.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

May I interpret this to mean you have no compassion for anyone fleeing a clear and present threat of death, forced gang membership, rape, and sexual exploitation of their families?

In Mexico?

Mexico, Guatamala and Honduras.

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Well, well, well... someone agrees with the President that there are -hole countries.  Funny how that works.

Next we'll come to the realization that defending our border would be a good idea.

If we reach advanced thought levels, we'll recognize that without defensible borders, shared language, and shared culture we aren't a country at all.

Perhaps there is hope for the left when logic and facts are applied to problem solving.  Any progress towards a better understanding is a positive step.

Nobody has claimed there aren't [BLEEP] hole countries, what is true is that [BLEEP] hole people don't necessarily come from [BLEEP] hole countries, and a POTUS who says they are does not represent me. Apparently, he represents you, to the core.

Are you saying we don't live in a country of varying cultures? Are you completely oblivious to the world around you?

---

If something can corrupt you, you're corrupted already.
- Bob Marley


 

Well, well, well... someone agrees with the President that there are -hole countries.  Funny how that works.

Next we'll come to the realization that defending our border would be a good idea.

If we reach advanced thought levels, we'll recognize that without defensible borders, shared language, and shared culture we aren't a country at all.

Perhaps there is hope for the left when logic and facts are applied to problem solving.  Any progress towards a better understanding is a positive step.

Your thoughts are moving too fast and skipping relevant questions along the way.

Are there sh*thole countries? Maybe.  Better question: is it appropriate or helpful for the President to declare that there are sh*thole countries? Even better question: can good people come from bad countries, or are they all tainted?  Of course good, productive people can come from even the most backwards, poor, and downtrodden country.

Is defending our border a good idea? Of course.  Better question: are we already doing so adequately? Isn't the problem more one of people overstaying their visas?

Is a shared language important? Of course. Better question: are immigrants today learning English more slowly or more quickly than previous waves? They are learning English more quickly.

A lot of gymnastics here, which were entirely unnecessary.  You produced no "better" questions, merely distractions from the main points of discussion.

There are legal paths to citizenship, which is our law, which are available to all who seek to come here.  There is no right for anyone to to come here from foreign countries.  That's quite clear cut.  If you'd like to become a citizen of our country, you're welcome to follow the process to achieve citizenship.

We certainly are not adequately defending our border.  Specifically, our southern border.  Overstay of visas is a separate topic entirely.  That also needs to be addressed, and separately.

Most illegals from Central and South America certainly are NOT learning the language.  Those same illegals certainly are not assimilating culture.  Those from other parts of the world are typically taught English along side their native tongue and know it prior to arriving.  That is much more typical of those who are entering legally.  In fact, there is little in common between those who enter legally and illegally.  Those who enter legally typically contribute to society.  Those who enter illegally typically end up being a burden on society rather than contributors.

It's a very myopic lens you're addressing these topics through.  You're not seeing things from a larger, more encompassing, more objective view.  Which, explains the attempted diversion.  You didn't rebut anything I said, you merely sidestepped it.  Understandably so, since you seem to be in denial that the most important pillars of defending our nation (borders, language and culture) are truly the most important pillars of our nation - and thus, also of immigration.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Your thoughts are moving too fast and skipping relevant questions along the way.

Are there sh*thole countries? Maybe.  Better question: is it appropriate or helpful for the President to declare that there are sh*thole countries? Even better question: can good people come from bad countries, or are they all tainted?  Of course good, productive people can come from even the most backwards, poor, and downtrodden country.

Is defending our border a good idea? Of course.  Better question: are we already doing so adequately? Isn't the problem more one of people overstaying their visas?

Is a shared language important? Of course. Better question: are immigrants today learning English more slowly or more quickly than previous waves? They are learning English more quickly.

A lot of gymnastics here, which were entirely unnecessary.  You produced no "better" questions, merely distractions from the main points of discussion.

There are legal paths to citizenship, which is our law, which are available to all who seek to come here.  There is no right for anyone to to come here from foreign countries.  That's quite clear cut.  If you'd like to become a citizen of our country, you're welcome to follow the process to achieve citizenship.

We certainly are not adequately defending our border.  Specifically, our southern border.  Overstay of visas is a separate topic entirely.  That also needs to be addressed, and separately.

Most illegals from Central and South America certainly are NOT learning the language.  Those same illegals certainly are not assimilating culture.  Those from other parts of the world are typically taught English along side their native tongue and know it prior to arriving.  That is much more typical of those who are entering legally.  In fact, there is little in common between those who enter legally and illegally.  Those who enter legally typically contribute to society.  Those who enter illegally typically end up being a burden on society rather than contributors.

It's a very myopic lens you're addressing these topics through.  You're not seeing things from a larger, more encompassing, more objective view.  Which, explains the attempted diversion.  You didn't rebut anything I said, you merely sidestepped it.  Understandably so, since you seem to be in denial that the most important pillars of defending our nation (borders, language and culture) are truly the most important pillars of our nation - and thus, also of immigration.

There is only one legal path to citizenship, and it is not available to all.  You need to become a green card holder first.  And to do that, you need one of these: family here who wants to sponsor you, an advanced degree in medicine or engineering, be a professional athlete, own at least half a million dollars worth of property or businesses in the US, or win a lottery that is only open to about half of the countries in the world.  The lottery excludes Mexico, China, the Philippines, and many other large countries.  If you're in Mexico but you don't have family already here, and you're not a world class athlete or medical doctor or software engineer, and don't have half a million dollars to spare there is literally no legal path for you to get here.  Which maybe is the best way for it to be.  But don't lie about it and say that everyone is welcome to "follow the process".  That's not true.  Over half of the world's population has no ability to participate in that process legally.  If that's the way you want it to be, say so.  Just don't pretend to be magnanimous about it.

As for the verifiable facts about how many people make it across our border the sneaky way without getting their passport stamped, how that's varied over time, and how well people have learned English over time, we'll just have to agree to disagree.  Scholars have done surveys on these topics and I would trust them more than I trust anecdotes or my gut.

Those who enter legally do typically contribute to society.  Nearly all of them use the family sponsorship process and people wouldn't go through all that effort to sponsor their relatives if they thought those relatives would not have good job prospects here.  But illegal immigrants also contribute more than you might think.  They all pay sales tax, and they all pay property tax indirectly.  Many of them pay income and social security taxes because they give fake SSN's to their employers.  Our government winks at this!  It should refuse to take the money and notify the employer that they have likely hired an illegal immigrant, threatening fines and prosecution if they don't correct the matter.  But no.  In this case our government withholds their income taxes, withholds their social security and medicare and medicaid taxes, but never gives them their tax refunds, and never gives them any of those benefits!  So illegal immigrants who don't have kids that were born here are *certainly* contributing more than they take from our governments.  They don't qualify for food stamps, subsidized housing.  They don't qualify for Medicaid, or social security, or medicare.  The only illegal immigrants who are really burdens from a tax and spending perspective are the ones who end up in jail or the ones who have kids that are US citizens and qualify for welfare - and most scholars who have analyzed this say that the contributions of the illegal immigrants who don't commit violent crimes or have multiple kids on welfare are greater than the takings of those who do.  

As far as what the three most important pillars of our nation, or any nation, are - that's too pie-in-the-sky for me, sorry.  But I'll try. 
Borders are important, but that's a tautology.  Every nation has borders, a place where the authority of their government ends.  Whether or not unarmed people are allowed to cross is not really relevant to the tautology. 
A common language is important, but, Switzerland and China have both been unified and independent much longer than us even though neither has a 100% common language.
Culture is important, and government can influence culture, but I don't think you've demonstrated that the immigrants we are bringing in are, in and of themselves, a negative impact to our culture.  
One thing that's probably just as important that you neglected is the rule of law.  The illegal immigration question is fundamentally about the fact that most American citizens understand their law to mean that there are about 11 million people here who should not be here, and they see their government do nothing about it.  This, understandably, makes them question whether we really have a rule of law and makes them more tempted to break the laws themselves and see if they also go relatively unpunished.  We need to deport some of these people.  We need to make others pay a fine so that they can stay.  We need to first warn and then punish the employers who hire the illegals. And then we need to let in more legal immigrants to replace the illegals as they leave.   We just need to stay calm and stay fact-based while we do so.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

As long as illegal immigration continues, legal immigration should lessen. You can't maintain a constant flow of legal and illegal immigrants. 

This is part of the problem with illegal immigration.

Illegal immigration has basically stopped. The rate of new people coming in illegally is about the same as the rate of illegal immigrants leaving. Most of the illegal immigrants here now arrived more than 10 years ago. If we do even more to encourage illegal immigrants to leave, like tighten up the e-verify system, we will need more legal immigrants to replace them in the workforce.

Do you have proof that illegal immigration has stopped?

---

Illegal immigration has basically stopped. The rate of new people coming in illegally is about the same as the rate of illegal immigrants leaving. Most of the illegal immigrants here now arrived more than 10 years ago. If we do even more to encourage illegal immigrants to leave, like tighten up the e-verify system, we will need more legal immigrants to replace them in the workforce.

Do you have proof that illegal immigration has stopped?

Who needs facts when we're so good at creative writing.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Illegal immigration has basically stopped. The rate of new people coming in illegally is about the same as the rate of illegal immigrants leaving. Most of the illegal immigrants here now arrived more than 10 years ago. If we do even more to encourage illegal immigrants to leave, like tighten up the e-verify system, we will need more legal immigrants to replace them in the workforce.

Do you have proof that illegal immigration has stopped?

Google "net migration rate us Mexico"

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Do you have proof that illegal immigration has stopped?

Google "net migration rate us Mexico"

I saw some articles that said there was a few hundred thousand plus Mexican illegals versus those that are leaving. Those numbers add up but they're still only from Mexico. That doesn't include other nations.

I didn't see a clear answer either way, so maybe you can provide one that suggests otherwise.

---