View Single Post
Old 02-14-2017, 04:29 PM   #22
detbuch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,688
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
Why must you be such an extremist? Nobody, except you, is saying "no one." Nor is anyone "looking for" a disregard of 100% of due process. Maybe you think extreme statements strengthen your argument? Actually, they weaken it--makes it look phony.

wdmso:Again you love stating things that are not there "some give the impression.. as if no one gets deported "if your not 1 of the Sum to whom I refer move on ...

What was not there was the "some." Who are the "some"? I have not heard of someone saying that "no one" is being deported. And if you sense an "impression" that "some" are saying that, it's not that the "some" are actually saying that or "giving" you anything other than what they actually say. "Some" are not "giving" you that impression, you are construing the impression in your own head.

wdmso:but clearly you haven't been listening to Trump prior to the election ..
Trump made immigration one of his highest-profile issues, saying he’d create a “special deportation task force” Mass-scale deportations

Is this an example of "some" saying "no one" is being deported? And, clearly, you haven't been listening to everything Trump said at various times including now, that he would start with the criminals. And would get to other as needed later.

wdmso:would upend parts of the economy, particularly in the agricultural sector, costing the government billions of dollars at a time of constrained finances. The wall would make a political statement but would do little to stop a major portion of new arrivals

The deportations are not en masse. They will be gradual. You aren't saying that deporting criminals will upend the economy, are you? And the expense of maintaining a permissive illegal alien policy is costing the government billions of dollars as it is. You're not looking at net/net. Just repeating hysterical talking points. His overall economic plan, including immigration policy as part of it, is forcasted by more optimistic (conservative?) economists to improve the economy . . . and therefor to create government revenue. If the wall helps a bit, and there is only conjecture that it won't help much, that's a plus. Anyway, the Congress mandated the wall to be built before Trump was elected. And the People voted on the premise that it would finally be built. If your the proponent on letting the people vote, as you've said, well, they did.

You're OK with the creation of sanctuary states.

wdmso:Let the people decide Vote

the people voted long ago. They decided that immigration was a Federal Exectutive domain. The President has the power to decide who can enter and stay in this country. Not the states.

You're OK with illegals remaining here and having fraudulent ID.

wdmso:they have had them for generations nothing new.. so have high school kids to get in to bars ..

As I said, you're OK with illegals remaining here and having fraudulent ID.

You're OK with states, rather than the Federal Government, having the power to decide who resides in their territory, and so being able to challenge or disregard any Federal Executive Order which conflicts with a state's desire in that manner.

wdmso:states rights thought conservatives where all about that

Conservatives are all about state's rights as given in the Constitution. For good or for bad, settled constitutional law gives the President, not the states the power to decide which aliens are allowed into this country.

You're OK with open borders, or no borders, with having an undefined country and undefined laws.

wdmso:imaginary conclusion by you

And You're not OK with corporations and banks "fleecing America" except You're OK with that in California because it helps to create a great GDP.


wdmso:another imaginary conclusion by you

I "imagined" the conclusion from the things you have been saying in this thread. And I pointed out how I came to that conclusion from your words. You have not shown how my "imagination" is wrong.

Last edited by detbuch; 02-14-2017 at 08:45 PM..
detbuch is offline