Be kinde to folk. This changeth the whole habitat.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 1
The same open ended question is being posed to Blue State Gov's and Blue City mayors as they re-state and re-inforce their sanctuary policies.
The question that lets them off the hook is, "Will you support mass deportations?
Provides opportunity for Blue State politician to launch into their particular version of virtue signaling about protecting our "residents" from ICE, (btw "residents" is a carefully chosen word used instead of "citizens").
A much better question, leading to more informed insight into the blue state politicians true mindset, would be to ask,
Interviewer: "Do you support the deportation of immigrants who commit violet felonies while in our country illegally?"
Blue State Politician: "No I do not, and I say again, we will not help in their deportation. My policy is that the criminals should be allowed to stay too."
No. of Recommendations: 2
Interviewer: "Do you support the deportation of immigrants who commit violent felonies while in our country illegally?"
Is that a good idea?
Send them back to wherever they came from, maybe they break out or buy their way out, and come back.
Would it be better to keep them in prison here, under our control?
No. of Recommendations: 2
Send them back to wherever they came from, maybe they break out or buy their way out, and come back.
Would it be better to keep them in prison here, under our control?
That's why the prison stock went up. Logistically, it's easier to just incarcerate them. Then we have to pay for the incarceration. A lot of that will be state statutes for criminals. And there are for profit prisons down South, not sure about the rest of the country. Are States stuck with the bill? Stay tuned for more As the Trump World Turns. Can we do polls here?
No. of Recommendations: 2
Blue State Politician: "No I do not, and I say again, we will not help in their deportation. My policy is that the criminals should be allowed to stay too."And these are the criminals liberals and Blue State politicians support and protect.
https://www.foxnews.com/us/ice-arrests-3-illegal-i...
No. of Recommendations: 9
Interviewer: "Do you support the deportation of immigrants who commit violet felonies while in our country illegally?"
Blue State Politician: "No I do not, and I say again, we will not help in their deportation. My policy is that the criminals should be allowed to stay too."The reason that people don't ask the question the way you suggest is because it's a super-easy answer for the Blue State politician. Sanctuary policies generally don't prohibit deportation of immigrants who are here unlawfully that are convicted of committing violent felonies while in the country illegally.
https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/researc...So, the BSP would probably have a different answer than the one you give above.
No. of Recommendations: 11
And these are the criminals liberals and Blue State politicians support and protect.
The BSP don't, but it is a nice piece of emotional propaganda.
No. of Recommendations: 17
Blue State Politician: "No I do not, and I say again, we will not help in their deportation. My policy is that the criminals should be allowed to stay too."
That's just bullshit, Mike. You're making up stuff to knock it down.
We already deport more than a million undocumented immigrants each year. Committing criminal acts is the fastest way to get yourself deported. Few people complain about that. Frankly, many on the left would support an increase in those deportations. They even had a bill in Congress that would have accomplished that.
No one supports non-citizen criminals remaining in the country without proper documentation to live here.
What many people DO support is finding a way for the undocumented who have been living productive, peaceful lives in the US for a while to stay here.
--Peter
No. of Recommendations: 1
Would it be better to keep them in prison here, under our control? - Adrian
-----------------
Oh sure, didn't mean they get a pass for their felony(ies). First they serve whatever sentence goes with their crimes. Then they get deported.
Here is a necessary feature of being deported. Border security must already be place and sufficiently effective that 99% of the time time you will be detected if you try to cross again. But if somehow you do sneak through, you will be caught soon enough. That makes you a repeat offender and eligible for extended prison time before being deported again. Don't ask about the third time.
No. of Recommendations: 6
Then we have to pay for the incarceration. A lot of that will be state statutes for criminals. And there are for profit prisons down South, not sure about the rest of the country. Are States stuck with the bill? Stay tuned for more As the Trump World Turns. Can we do polls here?
Yes, stuck with the bill….and Mexico and Venezuela don’t want them back…
And then, one fine day….Trump or one of his minions is going to come up with a brilliant idea…
Why not use these vermin to help pay for their own incarceration? After all, they’re getting shelter and three squares a day.
And now that we’ve rounded them up, the meat packing plants, produce farms and construction companies are all screaming for labor. So let’s farm them out for say… 50 dollars a day per vermin.
And that’s how slavery returns to America. Might as well make them help pay for their own incarceration.
No. of Recommendations: 1
So, the BSP would probably have a different answer than the one you give above. - albaby
---------------
That is the point really. The BSP answer that criminals must go will be agreeable to most any sane person. Right now the BSP response of resist with every fiber of my being is only reinforcing the boogeyman that Trumps evil desire is to deport Abuella.
No. of Recommendations: 1
The BSP don't, but it is a nice piece of emotional propaganda. - Lapsody
================
But that is NOT how they talk about it when they are bloviating in front of a microphone about their steely resistance to mass deportation. They could easily mention they will support deporting criminals but they don't because they get more virtue juice when the emphasis is on Trump will be coming for your Grandma.
No. of Recommendations: 1
What many people DO support is finding a way for the undocumented who have been living productive, peaceful lives in the US for a while to stay here.
------------
I agree with you here and most of them fit this category. I would add a caveat to the effect that as long as keep you nose clean and you can stay but there is NO path to citizenship for you.
BTW, when you say, "No one supports non-citizen criminals remaining in the country without proper documentation to live here". I agree with you on that too. But you should note the BSP never says that.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Trumps evil desire is to deport Abuella.
That’s what he’s saying. That’s what his chief minions are saying.
Deport them all. No more splitting families. Ship them ALL back to Mexico.
Trump even tweeted two nights ago that he wants to revoke birthright citizenship.
So BSPs will fight tooth and nail to ameliorate the excesses of his policies, forcing Trump to backtrack, and then MAGA will claim:
“See? You blue state weenies were worried about nothing!”
No. of Recommendations: 2
They could easily mention they will support deporting criminals
How are you defining criminals?
Is it the “really bad hombres?
Or does it also include Abuela who slipped across the border 30 years ago when she was 15?
Let’s get some specificity here.
No. of Recommendations: 5
The BSP answer that criminals must go will be agreeable to most any sane person. Right now the BSP response of resist with every fiber of my being is only reinforcing the boogeyman that Trumps evil desire is to deport Abuella.
No, it's not. I think you're arguing against a strawman, here. Even in sanctuary areas, if someone has been convicted of a violent crime committed while in the U.S. illegally, the local government isn't going to "resist with every fiber of [their] being" their deportation.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Deport them all. No more splitting families. Ship them ALL back to Mexico. - Bill
---------------
Actually Tom Homan did NOT say that. He said he will capture and deport the felon. What about separating the felon from the family. Homan said basically that is not an ICE issue, the family can decide to stay or to return to wherever with the criminal. He did say the US would pay for transportation if the family chooses to tag along.
BTW, Family Separation happens every day anytime a felon is sent to prison. Get over it.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Even in sanctuary areas, if someone has been convicted of a violent crime committed while in the U.S. illegally, the local government isn't going to "resist with every fiber of [their] being" their deportation. - albaby
-------------
Christ, get it through your head, I am not saying the BSP want the criminals to stay. The don't.
My issue is that the BSP are not mentioning the criminal exception in their bloviating, thus inflaming the issue, as intended I should add.
BTW that "fiber of their being" was the actual words used by one of them.
No. of Recommendations: 10
Christ, get it through your head, I am not saying the BSP want the criminals to stay. They don't.
My issue is that the BSP are not mentioning the criminal exception in their bloviating, thus inflaming the issue, as intended I should add.
Sorry - I was confused, then, by your OP. Where you imagined that a Blue State Politician was asked not about mass deportation generally, but specifically asked about the criminal exception. And then imagined that when specifically asked about the criminal exception, the BSP would say that they did not support the criminal exception.
Sounds like you agree that such a scenario would not play out that way, and that if directly asked about the criminal exception the BSP would of course acknowledge their support of the criminal exception. If your problem is that the BSP's standard stump speech doesn't explicitly call out the exception....well, yes, but I think it's because they feel like most people would understand in good faith that of course they're not talking about convicted violent criminals being protected from being deported. Talking about the strawman argument just promotes and gives visibility to the strawman argument.
No. of Recommendations: 2
Christ, get it through your head, I am not saying the BSP want the criminals to stay. The don't.
Sure about that? Let's ask Denver's Mayor what he thinks:
https://denverite.com/2024/11/20/denver-immigratio...The mayor also takes heart that the people of Denver — not just the administration — would likely resist a mass deportation effort from federal forces.
“More than us having DPD stationed at the county line to keep them out, you would have 50,000 Denverites there,” Johnston said. “It’s like the Tiananmen Square moment with the rose and the gun, right?” You’d have every one of those Highland moms who came out for the migrants. And you do not want to mess with them.” There you go. He wants a Tiananmen Square moment.
Insane in the membrane.
No. of Recommendations: 3
And that’s how slavery returns to America. Might as well make them help pay for their own incarceration.
Peonage. And chain gangs ended in the 50s, but we can bring them back. Wait, aren't they still used here in Florida sometimes? Let the Midnight Special shone it's light on me...
Yet another rude awakening. We won the war but lost the reconstruction. Jim Crow. The KKK. They burned crosses in my home town. I think the odds are pretty good that one of my relatives was in the KKK. One was a Doctor in the Civil War.
We made up laws that were used against blacks to throw them in jail and then we could set them to work and make up for some of the lost slave labor by convict leasing. And it looks like we mostly turned a blind eye to it for along time. But some states can't get some things done without that work IIRC.
No. of Recommendations: 1
Right now the BSP response of resist with every fiber of my being is only reinforcing the boogeyman that Trumps evil desire is to deport Abuella.
I know what you're saying, but there's a very real possibility that Trump will deport abuela.
No. of Recommendations: 2
I know what you're saying, but there's a very real possibility that Trump will deport abuela.
Is the abeula in question wanted on multiple felony charges? Then hell yeah, she gets shown to the exits.
I'm not sure what's so tough about this. If you're here illegally AND you're compounding things by committing crimes, there's the door.
No. of Recommendations: 2
But that is NOT how they talk about it when they are bloviating in front of a microphone about their steely resistance to mass deportation. They could easily mention they will support deporting criminals but they don't because they get more virtue juice when the emphasis is on Trump will be coming for your Grandma.
Listen, Trump has deliberately conjured up visions of mass deportation the logistics of which mystify us all, and you are complaining that out politicians talk resistance? Trump runs on generalities. Trump could have avoided all this if he'd come up with a reasonble plan, but that wouoldn't titilate his followers.
No. of Recommendations: 3
BHMBTW, when you say, "No one supports non-citizen criminals remaining in the country without proper documentation to live here". I agree with you on that too. But you should note the BSP never says that.
Democratic response when the Bill to Deport Illegal Aliens Who Assault Police was on the floor of the House:
I AM PREPARED TO CLOSE. MR. CHAIRMAN, ASSAULTING A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IS A SERIOUS OFFENSE THAT DESERVES BOTH CRIMINAL AND IMMIGRATION CONSEQUENCES. THAT IS WHY SERIOUS ASSAULTS ON LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ARE ALREADY IMMIGRATION VIOLATIONS THAT REQUIRE DETENTION AND DEPRECATION -- DEPORTATION. THE BILL BEFORE US TODAY WOULD DO NOTHING TO CHANGE THAT. THIS LEGISLATION WOULD DRAMATICALLY EXPAND THE TYPE OF CONDUCT THAT WOULD SUBJECT SOMEBODY TO MANDATORY DETENTION TO INCLUDE PEOPLE WHO MAY NOT HAVE EVEN COMMITTED A CRIME AT ALL. THAT IS NOT A GOOD USE OF OUR LIMITED LAW-ENFORCEMENT ENFORCEMENT RESOURCES. INSTEAD OF WASTING OUR TIME ON THESE BILLS, THEY DO NOTHING TO ADVANCE OUR IMMIGRATION SYSTEM. WE SHOULD BE WORKING TO CREATE A WORKABLE IMMIGRATION SYSTEM THAT ALLOWS AMERICANS TO REUNITE WITH THEIR FAMILY AND ALLOWS AMERICAN BUSINESSES AND UNIVERSITIES TO ATTRACT THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST, ESSENTIALLY CREATING A WORKABLE PROCESS SO THAT PEOPLE WOULD NOT BE FORCED TO GO TO THE BORDER AS THE ONLY WAY TO COME TO THE UNITED STATES. WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT IMMIGRANTS ARE GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY AND GOOD FOR OUR ECONOMY. ONE IN FOUR AMERICAN DOCTORS WERE BORN ABROAD AND ROUGHLY 45% TO FORTUNE 500 COMPANIES WERE FOUNDED BY IMMIGRANTS OR THE CHILDREN OF IMMIGRANTS. 70% OF AGRICULTURAL WORKERS ARE IMMIGRANTS. IMMIGRANTS FEED US, HEAL US AND HELP ENSURE THAT THIS COUNTRY REMAINS AND ECONOMIC POWERHOUSE. WE COULD BE EMBRACING THE POSITIVE IMPACTS OF IMMIGRANTS RATHER THAN DEMONIZING THEM. THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE RECENTLY ANNOUNCED THAT NEW IMMIGRANTS WILL ADD $1 TRILLION IN PREVIOUSLY UNEXPECTED REVENUE TO OUR COUNTRY'S GDP BETWEEN 2023 AND 2024. THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES FOUND THAT OVER A 15 YEAR PERIOD ASSIGNED POLICE AND REFUGEES CONTRIBUTED NEARLY $124 BILLION MORE IN REVENUE THAN THEY RECEIVED IN SERVICES FROM THE GOVERNMENT. DOCUMENTED AND UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS PAID TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TAXES EACH YEAR BUT INSTEAD THE MAJORITY INSISTS ON SCAPEGOATING AND FEAR MONGERING ANGLICAN -- FEAR MONGERING IMMIGRANTS. IT IS TRUE THAT THE IMMIGRATION SYSTEM HAS THE PROBLEMS BUT THEY CANNOT BE SOLVED THROUGH AN ENFORCEMENT ONLY APPROACH. WE HAVE BEEN TRYING THAT APPROACH FOR 30 YEARS AND IT HAS FELT. THE TRUTH IS THAT THE IMMIGRATION SYSTEM IS ALL CONNECTED. PEOPLE ARE COMING TO THE BORDER BECAUSE THE LEGAL IMMIGRATION SYSTEM HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED IN OVER 30 YEARS AND THEY CANNOT FIND ANY OTHER PATHWAY TO COME IN. THE MAJORITY OFTEN TALKS ABOUT LEGAL IMMIGRANTS. LET ME TELL YOU THAT THE WAIT TIME FOR SOME PERMANENT RESIDENCE TO BRING THEIR FAMILIES INTO THIS COUNTRY IS OVER A CENTURY LONG. ONE CENTURY FOR LEGAL PERMANENT RESIDENTS TO BRING THEIR FAMILIES INTO THE COUNTRY. EMPLOYERS ARE BEGGING US TO MODERNIZE THE EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRATION SYSTEM BECAUSE THE LIMITS ON HIGH-TECH VISAS WERE SET WHEN FLOPPY DISKS WERE THE HEIGHT OF TECHNOLOGY AND THESE COMPANIES CANNOT HIRE THE PEOPLE THEY NEED. THE SMALL NUMBER OF IMMIGRATION JUDGES THAT WE HAVE ARE ABSOLUTELY CRUSHED UNDER A MASSIVE BACKLOG OF ASYLUM CASES SO EXTENSIVE THAT IT IS NOW TAKING PEOPLE OVER EIGHT YEARS TO GET EVEN A HEARING. WHY DOESN'T THE MAJORITY JUST HELP US PUT MORE MONEY INTO IMMIGRATION JUDGES SO THAT WE CAN RESOLVE THAT BACKLOG? WHY NOT OPEN LEGAL PATHWAYS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO COME HERE LEGALLY? I KNOW THIS BECAUSE I CAME HERE AND IT TOOK ME 17 YEARS WHY DOESN'T THE MAJORITY JUST HELP US PUT MORE MONEY INTO IMMIGRATION JUDGES? SO WE CAN RESOLVE THAT BACKLOG? WHY NOT OPEN LEGAL PATHWAYS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO COME HERE LEGALLY. I KNOW THIS, MR. CHAIRMAN. BECAUSE I CAME HERE. IT TOOK ME 17 YEARS TO NAVIGATE THE IMMIGRATION SYSTEM AND BECOME A U.S. CITIZEN. THAT WAS SEVERAL DECADES AGO. NOW YOU CAN'T EVEN GET THROUGH THE PROCESS.
The real answer is that it's political theater.
No. of Recommendations: 1
I'm not sure what's so tough about this. If you're here illegally AND you're compounding things by committing crimes, there's the door. - dope
----------
It is so simple, yet the BSP prioritize immigrants over citizens and feel virtuous about it.
No. of Recommendations: 2
The real answer is that it's political theater.
-------------
Overwhelmed by CAPS. could not read.
No. of Recommendations: 7
Overwhelmed by CAPS. could not read.
THAT’S WORTH A REC!!!
No. of Recommendations: 2
Overwhelmed by CAPS. could not read.
That's why I bolded. I read it, but that's how the transcript came.
No. of Recommendations: 0
All caps was annoying, but I assumed it was a cut and paste thing. If all caps stops one from getting the gist, then one probably doesn't really want to know anyway. JMO.
