TSA airport security - still no pay ?

[royamcr]

Originally Posted by lustylad

What they really want, but won't come out and say, is to ABOLISH ICE. Once you dissolve the enforcement mechanism for our immigration laws, then you've thrown the borders wide open again. Overstay your visa? Asylum claim denied? Commit a crime? Not to worry - there's nobody around to deport you!

The reason Dems won't admit this is because they remember how badly the DEFUND THE POLICE movement backfired on them after the George Floyd riots. They know they have to be sneakier this time. Hide those ABOLISH ICE banners. Instead, let's just say we're fighting for "reforms" like body cams and removing facemasks lol.

Defunding police was never a thing. It was reallocation of funds to address root causes of problems in society. Brute force and military level weaponized police forces haven't worked.

If ICE wants to operate legally as a police force then they all should be identifiable and held accountable for their actions. I'm not against removing immigrants here illegally. They aren't criminals. Overstaying visas are civil violations of immigration law rather than criminal misdemeanors. If their visa is expired and not being renewed they should leave or made to leave.

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Democrats have learned their lessons. A porous border is no longer in the cards. I really believe that the only desire by congressional democrats is to reform ICE and Border Patrol and to stop the terror tactics being used to paint every illegal alien or protester as evil villains out to destroy the United States.

If you truly believe that, you’ve been propagandized beyond all recognition. Ask yourself why, after all the bullshit about needing thousands of pages in legislation to stop illegal border crossings, Trump was able to do it in a week. Biden, and his border czar (remember her?), were either full of shit and WANTED the border wide open, or are completely, utterly incompetent.

Whether they’ve learned their lesson or not remains to be seen. I don’t see any democrat with a snowball’s chance in 28 (Shapiro maybe, but his being Jewish doesn’t fly with large swaths of the dem base), but they ~may~ someday regain control of the executive branch. Chances are the borders will once again be flung open if that ever happens, because they want them open.

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by royamcr

Defunding police was never a thing. It was reallocation of funds to address root causes of problems in society.

Seriously? It’s the same damn thing. Taking money from thing A and giving it to thing B (or not spending it at all) is the definition of defunding thing A. You can call it reallocation, redirecting, or snuffleupagus if you want. A rose by any other name, bro.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

If you truly believe that, you’ve been propagandized beyond all recognition. Ask yourself why, after all the bullshit about needing thousands of pages in legislation to stop illegal border crossings, Trump was able to do it in a week. Biden, and his border czar (remember her?), were either full of shit and WANTED the border wide open, or are completely, utterly incompetent.

Whether they’ve learned their lesson or not remains to be seen. I don’t see any democrat with a snowball’s chance in 28 (Shapiro maybe, but his being Jewish doesn’t fly with large swaths of the dem base), but they ~may~ someday regain control of the executive branch. Chances are the borders will once again be flung open if that ever happens, because they want them open.

And if you believe that, then you don’t understand propaganda … or reality.

Don’t worry, you’ll be allowed to leave.

[Jacuzzme]

Then answer the question. Why couldn’t the Biden administration close the border in four years and Trump did it in four days? Was it gross incompetence or that they simply didn’t want it done? It’s gotta be one or the other.

[Yssup Rider]

Hello Jack!

You want to do this, Jacuzzme, start a new thread. Don’t interrogate me in this one.

And… bullshit, by the way. It didn’t happen either way you said. Selective memory? Nah, I’d call it something else.

[Jacuzzme]

[royamcr]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Seriously? It’s the same damn thing. Taking money from thing A and giving it to thing B (or not spending it at all) is the definition of defunding thing A. You can call it reallocation, redirecting, or snuffleupagus if you want. A rose by any other name, bro.

If thing A isn't working, giving money to thing B to try to address root causes that thing A can't solve might be a good thing? Police can't be everywhere all the time, for the most part police are jumping from one call after the fact and on to the next. That isn't solving any problems. Giving them more money doesn't change this. A typical Republican trait is to resist change which is evident in this case. What do you want a police state? Also these changes take years or decades to see the effects. If changes aren't felt in a short term, republicans generally throw their hands up and say see didn't work.

[royamcr]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

If you truly believe that, you’ve been propagandized beyond all recognition. Ask yourself why, after all the bullshit about needing thousands of pages in legislation to stop illegal border crossings, Trump was able to do it in a week. Biden, and his border czar (remember her?), were either full of shit and WANTED the border wide open, or are completely, utterly incompetent.

Whether they’ve learned their lesson or not remains to be seen. I don’t see any democrat with a snowball’s chance in 28 (Shapiro maybe, but his being Jewish doesn’t fly with large swaths of the dem base), but they ~may~ someday regain control of the executive branch. Chances are the borders will once again be flung open if that ever happens, because they want them open.

Trump didn't do shit in a week. Most border crossings aren't illegal. The legislation was to modernize and speed up decades old immigration policy. Of course trump can't do that he is too dumb. He hires and arms 1000s of masked cowards to go door to door and illegally search for the "criminals" So pathetic.

[Precious_b]

Originally Posted by lustylad

You are intentionally mischaracterizing what happened.

Stung by the public's anger at them, the hostage-taking Dems are offering to release some of their hostages while continuing to hold others. Sorry txdot, they're still hostage-takers. The end doesn't justify the means.

LOL! That is something maggies do all the time. Examples to follow.

Originally Posted by txdot-guy

I don’t believe that I’m mischaracterizing anything. Unfortunately that’s how our system of government works. In a closely divided government where the power lies in the power of the purse government disfunction and chaos follows if compromise can’t be achieved.

You just want to blame one side for advocating for the desires of their constituents more than the other.

Senate Democrats want to fund most of the government except for the part where they disagree with the way it’s working. I.E. ICE and CBP. They want to be seen as opposing Trump and making sure Federal law enforcement acts less like storm troopers and more like police.

Republicans want to paint democrats as destroying the country by allowing an invasion of foreigners who will rape, rob, and suckle at the government teat.

I really believe that this is being dragged out on both sides because the Republicans want to continue to use this as a wedge issue in the midterms.

Don’t you?

Yupper.

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Why do democrats want to remove funding from the people who stop foreigners from coming into the country illegally, and the ones who remove them when they did? We all know the answer to that question, but many won’t admit it.

Ol' Schumer (sp) clearly states why. You just want to do as lusty exclaims.

Originally Posted by lustylad

What they really want, but won't come out and say, is to ABOLISH ICE. Once you dissolve the enforcement mechanism for our immigration laws, then you've thrown the borders wide open again. Overstay your visa? Asylum claim denied? Commit a crime? Not to worry - there's nobody around to deport you!

The reason Dems won't admit this is because they remember how badly the DEFUND THE POLICE movement backfired on them after the George Floyd riots. They know they have to be sneakier this time. Hide those ABOLISH ICE banners. Instead, let's just say we're fighting for "reforms" like body cams and removing facemasks lol.

Can you please produce the link to the congressional bill that states ABOLISH ICE? Only one that has been stated is for them to act like professional law enforcement agency. Not Brown Shirts.

Originally Posted by royamcr

Defunding police was never a thing. It was reallocation of funds to address root causes of problems in society. Brute force and military level weaponized police forces haven't worked.

If ICE wants to operate legally as a police force then they all should be identifiable and held accountable for their actions. I'm not against removing immigrants here illegally. They aren't criminals. Overstaying visas are civil violations of immigration law rather than criminal misdemeanors. If their visa is expired and not being renewed they should leave or made to leave.

Correct.

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Seriously? It’s the same damn thing. Taking money from thing A and giving it to thing B (or not spending it at all) is the definition of defunding thing A. You can call it reallocation, redirecting, or snuffleupagus if you want. A rose by any other name, bro.

Don't be like lusty exclaims.

Many places this works. Even in shithole places.
Check out Camden, NJ. Tell us that it is not a sound move there.

Originally Posted by royamcr

If thing A isn't working, giving money to thing B to try to address root causes that thing A can't solve might be a good thing? Police can't be everywhere all the time, for the most part police are jumping from one call after the fact and on to the next. That isn't solving any problems. Giving them more money doesn't change this. A typical Republican trait is to resist change which is evident in this case. What do you want a police state? Also these changes take years or decades to see the effects. If changes aren't felt in a short term, republicans generally throw their hands up and say see didn't work.

Another typical maggie trait, "intentionally mischaracterizing what happened."

[Jacuzzme]

Originally Posted by royamcr

If thing A isn't working, giving money to thing B to try to address root causes that thing A can't solve might be a good thing?

And I like blondes with c cups, but that also has nothing to do with the price of tea in China. Defunding is defunding, regardless of what excuses/reasons are used to justify it or what synonyms are used describe it.

Trump didn't do shit in a week.

ORLY? Live in denial much? I know your butthurt that Trump’s the president is tough to overcome, but you don’t seriously want to debate the undeniable do you? Maybe after that we can toss around if water is wet.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

And I like blondes with c cups, but that also has nothing to do with the price of tea in China. Defunding is defunding, regardless of what excuses/reasons are used to justify it or what synonyms are used describe it.



ORLY? Live in denial much? I know your butthurt that Trump’s the president is tough to overcome, but you don’t seriously want to debate the undeniable do you? Maybe after that we can toss around if water is wet.

Ingles por favor.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Ingles por favor.

???

Even a pendejo knows ORLY = Oh really?

[Lantern2814]

Originally Posted by royamcr

Seeking asylum is not illegal and does not make them criminal illegals. They can't leave the country until their case is presented in court and this can take years, sometimes 8 to 10 years.

There is no provision to apply for this protection from abroad.

INA § 208 (8 U.S.C. § 1158): Establishes the right to apply for asylum. Applicants must generally apply within one year of arrival

I think I remember a Republican led bipartisan Immigration bill that Trump stomped on. We are living under immigration law written in the 1960s. There was some reform in the mid 80s.

As per that "international law" you people keep screeching about, those illegals HAVE to seek asylum in the FIRST free country they come to. Meaning MEXICO. Not here. Wanting a bunch of free stuff is not a legal reason for asylum either.

[69in2it69]

FIRST free country... Can you post the link to the GLOBAL definition of "free country?" that overrides the US law (that's the one that applies in the US) that says:


any noncitizen physically present in or arriving in the U.S. may apply for asylum, regardless of status.