You're conflating. That 19% is for DACA only. Not any and all who cross the border illegally.
POLITICAL THREAD
- Thread starter kybobcat
- Start date
You're conflating. That 19% is for DACA only. Not any and all who cross the border illegally.
He used the word twice at work, they didn’t even fire him the first time.
I’m among those that doesn’t think a white person should ever really use that word, even jokingly, he is at work for one of the most leftist companies...twice used the word and in front of black employees both times. Don’t know if he is racist but no doubt dumb as f—k.
I actually don’t think more context matters here. If they are talking in a meeting about some show or program using the word he could have easily just said ‘the N word’ instead of the word.
Off topic, but a Netflix related note: anybody ever had to call there customer service? By far the best. Have had to call them 2-3 times and am shocked how easy it is compared to other companies these days.
What about the lightning? Surely you’re not suggesting people choose to get hit by lightning?
I appreciate your candor.
I'm not sure the citizenry is going to embrace your policies.
Incorrect. The 19% I cited is from this poll where the question asked was, "Which comes closest to your view about illegal immigrants who are currently living in the United States? A) They should be allowed to stay in the United States and to eventually apply for U.S. citizenship. B) They should be allowed to remain in the United States, but not be allowed to apply for U.S. citizenship. C) They should be required to leave the U.S."
Only 19% answered C.
The question ostensibly about DACA you're referring to was this one, "Do you support or oppose allowing undocumented immigrants who were brought to the U.S. as children to remain in the United States and eventually apply for citizenship?"
79% supported and only 15% opposed.
Last edited:
That stat came from NBC. About as believable as CNN
I didn’t mention lightning now did I. However, a person can easily avoid lightning, when it storms simply go inside. You know when it’s coming, but I seriously doubt more people in the United States are hit by lightning than are criminally affected by illegal aliens, I simply do not buy that.
Yeah, he's the best friend of Cartels, coyotes, drug smugglers, human traffickers. They'd love nothing more. You think business is booming now.
Also, I'm assuming he's all for them being able to vote as well.
But to exist safely in society is governments job. Kate steinly was standing on an effing pier and died due to the actions of illegal immigration.
Currently living, not currently crossing the border illegally. Also, for how long have they been currently living? One day? Five years?
If you show me a poll where only 19% of Americans are for deporting those who cross the border illegally, then I'll show you a poll that's full of shit. Trump won the presidency vowing to deport all 11 million. His hardcore base alone is more than 19%.
I was huge Ryan fan growing up, dude was a horse. When he had his stuff he was almost unhittable.
My uncle and cousin were sitting right behind third base when he threw his 7th no hitter, cousin saved the ticket stub.
No, but they choose to be in the situation that exposes them to the lightening.
How would those stats look if they were for the decade of 2001-2010?
New York taxpayers should be furious their mayor is wasting time and money in Texas doing nothing but getting a few retweets
Seattle mayor also wasting time on the border. However, before she traveled down to south TX, she at least allocated funds for 500 more homeless beds. Too bad thousands more remain on the streets.
Indeed. Your point? That's normal statistical variance. That 19% could be as low as 15% or as high as 23%. Not a large difference either way. Going to start arguing over margin of error now?
Shaking my MF head.
If SJWs mess with Blue Bell Neapolitan, then I'm really gonna be pissed.
![[roll]](http://l.yimg.com/j/assets/img/emoticons/classic/roll.r191677.gif "roll [roll]")
Oh this is great news.I gotta buy some Blue Bell today.
*actually turned out to be a good story. Blue Bell CAN unite the people.
One last time, "currently living", to most people, doesn't mean what you think it means. It doesn't mean someone who crossed the border last week, or even last year, and/or is currently still in federal custody, awaiting an outcome to his/her immigration case.
"Currently living", to most people, means actually living here, been here for five to 10 years, has started a life, family, has roots, became a productive member of society, etc... You know, those in that 11 million, that are probably closer to 20 million now, that we hear so much about.
This commercial has been around for roughly 2-3 years. Still receives much air-time back in TX.
I gotta buy some Blue Bell today.
Loved the following from one article I saw about this:
“After dishing out the desert, Schmidley said her oldest son, 10, jokingly called the Great Divide flavor the Civil War. The line down the middle of the cartoon reminded him of the Mason Dixon line, and the name reminded him of a time in history when our nation appeared irrevocably divided.”
She is either full of sh-t or she has the wokest ten year old ever.
Lol they’re homeschooled, probably more advanced than average 10yo. Plus, the average IQ of Blue Bell eaters is 140! Tmfs.
This is what the courts told Obama about his catch and release policy, his work around to not separating families. The laws exist for a reason. You're not rewarded, nor are you above the law, simply because you're a parent.
Instead of arresting Salmeron Santos for instigating the conspiracy to violate our border security laws, the DHS delivered the child to her — completing the mission of the criminal conspiracy. It did not arrest her. It did not prosecute her. It did not even initiate deportation proceedings for her.
[Salmeron Santos] purposefully chose this course of action. Her decision to smuggle the child across the border, even if motivated by the best of motives, is not an excuse for the United States government to further a criminal conspiracy, and by doing so, encourage others to break the law and endanger additional children.
This is the fourth case with the same factual situation this court has had in as many weeks. In all of the cases, human traffickers who smuggled minor children were apprehended short of delivering the children to their ultimate destination. In all cases, a parent, if not both parents, of the children was in this country illegally. That parent initiated the conspiracy to smuggle the minors into the country illegally. He or she also funded the conspiracy.
In each case, the DHS completed the criminal conspiracy, instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, by delivering the minors to the custody of the parent illegally living in the United States. The DHS is rewarding criminal conduct instead of enforcing the current laws. More troubling, the DHS is encouraging parents to jeopardize the safety of their children. ... Those who hear that they should not fear prosecution or deportation will not hesitate, and obviously have not hesitated, to act likewise.
Finally, the Court is aware that prosecutors and law enforcement officers, including those here on the border, frequently use their discretion to defer the prosecution or arrest of individuals. This Court is not opposed to the concept of prosecutorial discretion, if that discretion is exercised with a sense of justice and common sense. Nevertheless, it is not aware of any legal principle, including prosecutorial discretion, that not only allows the Government to decline prosecution, but further allows it to actually complete the intended criminal mission. The DHS should enforce the laws of the United States - not break them.
Instead of arresting Salmeron Santos for instigating the conspiracy to violate our border security laws, the DHS delivered the child to her — completing the mission of the criminal conspiracy. It did not arrest her. It did not prosecute her. It did not even initiate deportation proceedings for her.
[Salmeron Santos] purposefully chose this course of action. Her decision to smuggle the child across the border, even if motivated by the best of motives, is not an excuse for the United States government to further a criminal conspiracy, and by doing so, encourage others to break the law and endanger additional children.
This is the fourth case with the same factual situation this court has had in as many weeks. In all of the cases, human traffickers who smuggled minor children were apprehended short of delivering the children to their ultimate destination. In all cases, a parent, if not both parents, of the children was in this country illegally. That parent initiated the conspiracy to smuggle the minors into the country illegally. He or she also funded the conspiracy.
In each case, the DHS completed the criminal conspiracy, instead of enforcing the laws of the United States, by delivering the minors to the custody of the parent illegally living in the United States. The DHS is rewarding criminal conduct instead of enforcing the current laws. More troubling, the DHS is encouraging parents to jeopardize the safety of their children. ... Those who hear that they should not fear prosecution or deportation will not hesitate, and obviously have not hesitated, to act likewise.
Finally, the Court is aware that prosecutors and law enforcement officers, including those here on the border, frequently use their discretion to defer the prosecution or arrest of individuals. This Court is not opposed to the concept of prosecutorial discretion, if that discretion is exercised with a sense of justice and common sense. Nevertheless, it is not aware of any legal principle, including prosecutorial discretion, that not only allows the Government to decline prosecution, but further allows it to actually complete the intended criminal mission. The DHS should enforce the laws of the United States - not break them.
Nothing worse than white liberals that want to tear the entire system apart to better an ideological cause. They are destroying this country for their grandchildren. And also setting the table for another concentration camp scene when they create hate in minorities minds, then give them the power to destroy their enemies.
If people think this can’t happen think again.
While liberals are the dumbest people imaginable. I’ve got news for them. In 2100 when their great great grandchildren are minoroties, they have set the table for justifiable genocide.
It's as if 905 people truly represents the opinion of 330 million people
The scores of Mexican Jihadists completely destroy that argument. Look at all the damage they've already done to Mexican restaurants, American's looking for gardening or janitorial work and the American language. It's got to STOP!!!
Watching Mexico play in the World Cup. How can all those poor Mexicans afford a trip to Russia?
Similar threads
