RSS
My statement on the White House immigration proposal: pic.twitter.com/Xh1YKNtRYY
— Senator Dick Durbin (@SenatorDurbin) January 26, 2018
The immigration plan announced by the White House tonight is a complete nonstarter. Pitting young Dreamers against immigrant families runs counter to the values of our country.
— Vice President Kamala Harris (@VP) January 26, 2018
It would be far cheaper to erect a 50-foot concrete statue of a middle finger and point it towards Latin America. Both a wall and the statue would be equally offensive and equally ineffective and both would express Trump’s deeply held suspicion of Latinos. https://t.co/R8g4iRHzYX
— Luis V. Gutierrez (@RepGutierrez) January 25, 2018
It’s almost as if it really isn’t about the Alien Minors, it’s about electing a new people to insure one party rule.
Are the Democrats going to shut down the government again?
One thing missing in the discussion is that Mr. Trump is a very Latin American-style president. Not every Latin American leader is left wing. You got your left wing leaders and your very, very right wing leaders and all of them are “flamboyant” by U.S. standards?
So could people consider that having Mr. Trump is a consequence of making the U.S. so much more Latin American, both in the intended as well as unintended ways? For the Open Our Borders to Latin America advocates, be careful what you wish for?
I hope all the eeyores see this.
But seriously, some friendly advice: Don't hold your breath.
So what precisely did Trump gain from proposing it to begin with?
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.
--Immediate termination of chain migration rather than a 17-year phase in
--Deeper cuts to merit-based immigration
--Mandatory eVerify
--End to birthright citizenship
But that's not what this proposal does.Replies: @Anonymous
It has nothing to do with chess, but it sure does have a lot of j-street commenters in a fit. Bravo.
This is a point that people seem to be missing.
Dealing with illegal immigrants doesn't require new legislation or permission from Congress, other than funding the relevant agencies, because illegal immigration is already illegal, by definition. Its just a matter of law enforcement, which is purely an executive branch preview.
It was obvious that Trump wouldn't get a nationalist Congress and the Congressional leadership would be either GOP globalists, if not the Democrats who were predicted to have a Senate majority. However, for his supporters just electing him to head the executive branch still would have done some good since his signature issue, immigration, as mainly an executive branch issue.
And the DACA people are violating the law, so you don't need a deal to start deporting them, you just have to wait until the current restrictions expire.
Where new legislation is needed is on restrictions on legal immigration. From what I can tell, the Trump Administration is attempting to trade continued lax enforcement on a sub-section of illegal immigrants in favor of more restricted legal immigration. This strikes me as a backwards way of doing things. Changes in the law don't matter until you have confidence that they are going to be enforced. Shouldn't Trump be trading something like the state and local tax deductions in return for proposed changes to immigration laws?
I don't usually go for the 11-dimensional chess business and here, I'm not even sure what his intentions are. But I can say that I'm kinda meh on the Trump's policy, but as a proposal it's great.
Specifically, it's very important in politics to be able to say X have our intended audience hear us as X, instead of what they previously imagined of us. This is especially true of anything associated with Trump, which is going to be colored by Trump's tweets regarding the failure of Mika Brezinski's facelift or hush money to adult movie actresses.
For us, we need to be able to talk about the substance of the immigration issue without these distractions. Specifically, we need to be able to say a few things that aren't usually mentioned.
1. For the Dreamers (and other illegal immigrants for that matter) they've already been here illegally 1, 5, 10 however many years and were brought here illegally to begin with. What's the urgency in making them legal now? We don't usually dwell on this because restrictionists simply want them deported. But there's a lot of Americans who are comfortable by legalizing them in some fashion. Fine, why is it so important to do now.
2. We have to motivate our fellow Americans to assert our self-determination and defend the human capital of our citizens.
This proposal moves the ball forward on both counts. It may fail or it may succeed, but in contrast to some of Trump's other communications, it's clearly not a joke. This gives us the space to talk apples-to-apples with the American people in way where there's legitimate hope that they will sympathetic to us.
They did and that's what he 'gained'.
Take this, Berty:
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/20180118_farce.jpg?itok=UAcRKyAqReplies: @EdwardM
Support for restricting immigration is soft in the Republican party, especially in the Senate - why give those bastards any excuse to cuck out on the deal. Immigration reform (and by reform, I mean restriction) should not be tied to DACA anyway. And the Republicans shouldn't let the Democrats tie it to DACA.
He made the White Genocide Party look like petty, unreasonable obstructionists. He won.
Again some of you all are think your immigration restriction fantasies are viable policies that have any chance of becoming law. The GOP can’t get restrictionist stuff passed among their own caucus let alone getting Dems on board. By presenting this bill he shows how unreasonable the Dems are to the American people. Also makes it easier to let DACA expire and deport if it comes to that.
I swear what do you types think would have happened if Clinton or any other GOP candidate had won? We’d be staring at a full on DREAM Act with nothing in exchange. By all means though bash us that see reason as Trump sychophants.Replies: @Jack Hanson
Thread:
https://www.twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/956669072158154760
Note that neither is initial post nor the 4 follow-up tweets mentions: 1) how many immigrants we already take in annually (~1.1 million, not counting illegals); 2) how many immigrants currently live here and what fraction of our current population they comprise (~46 million, 15%); or 3) how many anchor babies are born to non-citizens/illegals each year (a few hundred thousand).
Talking about 'brutal cuts' to immigration levels without telling/reminding the reader what those levels actually are is pretty much the standard when the Left discusses immigration.
The current policy gives preference to parents, spouses and children but not siblings....the new policy will result in more younger immigrants, as parents will not be eligible..Legal immigration will remain well over 1 million per year. The 50,000 diversity lottery visas will be distributed to more skilled applicants...no change in the number of immigrants. Wish he did limit Legal immigration to 950,000 per year, to make it clear there would be little change and force the democrats to discuss why 1.2 million is better than 1 million per year.Replies: @Opinionator
The Democrats put the interests of DACA recipients before American citizens. And they put the interests of future immigrants that don’t exist yet ahead of DACA recipients.
Its a moral perversion where you demonstrate your virtue by favoring the people you’re least obligated to take care of.
>It’s almost as if it really isn’t about the Alien Minors, it’s about electing a new people to insure one party rule.
Even if they get majority rule, the road is going to be a lot bumpier than the bien-pensants think, for multiple reasons. Their coalition is just way too unstable, especially since the real heartbeat of the Democratic Party is the upper-middle class and tech oligarchs. Eventually, someone far smarter than Trump is going to come along-whether as a Republican or as a third party operator at this point, I have no clue-and he’ll exploit that.
Guess how many Latinos would be interested in playing second fiddle to blacks down the road as they begin to dwarf them, population wise? An incident next to an inconvenient camera can cause problems. Just look at what happened to the Koreans in ’92.
Another problem is that America has a way of raising expectations in people. You’ll never get them to admit it, but deep down, the bien-pensants essentially think they’ll remain happy debt peons like they were back in Mexico (Central Americans are far more used to neo-feudalism and less likely to talk back to either politicians or bosses, especially in the increasingly dominant service sector. Very much unlike modern native American whites or blacks, or for that matter, Tejanos), as does the Mexican government that views them as a good source of remittance money and political heft. I’m skeptical.
So could people consider that having Mr. Trump is a consequence of making the U.S. so much more Latin American, both in the intended as well as unintended ways? For the Open Our Borders to Latin America advocates, be careful what you wish for?Replies: @nebulafox
I personally think of Trump as the American Berlusconi. But I could see him as a right-wing Latin American leader-albeit of the corrupt, bombastic plutocrat type, not military caudillo kind.
Maybe he should offer to recognize Los Angeles as the capital of Mexico and move our embassy there.
After all, they took it years ago and continue to build settlements…
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
It might have made sense to do if it had been accompanied by a harder line on other fronts:
–Immediate termination of chain migration rather than a 17-year phase in
–Deeper cuts to merit-based immigration
–Mandatory eVerify
–End to birthright citizenship
But that’s not what this proposal does.
There's one other thing that could be done in addition to all of this that would be extremely effective: Prohibit financial institutions from serving illegal aliens. The superstructure to do this is already there, post-9/11. The Patriot Act, FATCA, Know Your Customer, and other initiatives have effectively denied financial services to American expats. All that Treasury has to do is modify these regulations to apply to illegal aliens in the U.S.
No bank accounts or bank transfer services unless you're a citizen, have an immigrant visa (i.e., green card), have a current nonimmigrant visa (money goes bye-bye if you don't withdraw it by the expiration date of your visa), or are otherwise legally in the country (e.g., refugee and asylee applacants). This could be phased in to give banks time to ramp it up: new accounts and any account that has done an international money transfer are first in line.
The lack of financial services would make the U.S. a lot less attractive to illegal aliens, driving them to Bitcoin, perhaps, but Bitcoin providers are well regulated in the U.S. and obey Know Your Customer and other practices.
Finally, maybe it's time for the Trump good cop, Nixon-in-China transition, where he declares that he loves illegal aliens and Mexico and taco bowls, and to make touchdown in their home countries as comfortable as possible for the returnees, he's proposing that the U.S. provide foreign aid for job training, international schools, transistional housing, and whatever other needs our soon-to-be-gone 11 million may have in their home countries. Heck, pay them each a couple of thousand dollars on the way out to get out and stay out (after taking photos, fingerprints, iris scans, and DNA for future identification; we love you on the way out, but come back and there's jail time). It's worth the money, and cheaper in the long run to do it like this.Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist, @Anonymous
I’m loving this! Maybe Trump will demand another $500,000,000 for the finger statue.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
Well, it may very well be his plan to come off as the reasonable one. The Democrats do come off as ridiculous in rejecting this outright.
Echo chamber here.Replies: @Desiderius, @ben tillman
It would be far cheaper to erect a 50-foot concrete statue of a middle finger and point it towards Latin America.
Could we? For real?
Apart from the fact that that just sounds like a fun thing to do, it’d be payback for that “Deport This” kid.
https://goo.gl/images/EXDKvq
I agree. Yawn. This is, what, the six or seven hundredth time Trump has stabbed us in the back? As we’re assured by a breathless media? And yet . . . somehow . . . a little time goes by and no one even remembers the fuss. You would think his record would have at least earned Trump more of a “well, let’s wait and see.”
--No immigration restriction legislation has been signed into law
--The mass migration of foreigners into our country continues apace
--The highest priority in the public sphere is a DACA amnesty
--eVerify and birthright citizenship aren't even on the president's radarReplies: @Rod1963, @Noah172, @Maj. Kong, @Jack Hanson, @Ed
Let’s all admit that “the wall” is a really dumb idea. It was something that sounded funny and vaguely desirable when Trump proposed it, but the idea doesn’t stand up to even minimal scrutiny.
Anyway, getting rid of chain migration is necessary, but less important than abolishing birthright citizenship, preferably retroactively, which no one prominent is even discussing.
Last week FISA was renewed…
And Tillerson announced permanent troops in Syria…
Today the mask really slipped. If Trump had 70% approval he would amnesty all 30million.
Remember: Pumping the economy from 2004-2008 didn’t make America great again…
It's like no-one even cares anymore.
There are two parallel action plots nowadays:
1) Levels of politicking, grandstanding and aimless clownery on a level that even Pinochet would hesistate to aerodrop persons involved into the ocean out of concern that this might lead to extreme levels of oceanic pollution.
2) Deep State / MIC / Zionist League of America steaming on like a possessed muscle car fueled by printed "money" doing whatever it well likes.It's like the heady feel before the Internet Bubble Pop again. Like, just before.Replies: @Anonymous
I hope Harris gets nomination: the affirmative action detectives already have her eau du Barry
We are 1/4 of the way through his presidency and:
–No security fence construction is underway
–No immigration restriction legislation has been signed into law
–The mass migration of foreigners into our country continues apace
–The highest priority in the public sphere is a DACA amnesty
–eVerify and birthright citizenship aren’t even on the president’s radar
The real source of evil is McConnell. He needs to go but Trump won't say shit about the anti-American POS.
He is probably the most corrupt and vile man ever to walk the Earth.Replies: @nebulafox
- No other Senator has co-sponsored the rather mild Cotton-Perdue bill. Hard to get from 2 to 60.
- The administration has been doing decent things through the executive branch (deportations, fewer refugees [far fewer Muslim refugees], holding up H1B applications and renewals, fighting for the travel restriction in court [already won once with Supremes]).
-DACA is the only thing to offer the Democrats to get them to consider restrictionist measures without offering up the whole illegal population. It also forces them into these damaging govt shutdown antics.
-Legit criticism.Replies: @Opinionator
Birthright also happens to be the name of Sheldon Adelson's sponsored vacations in Israel for Jewish teens.
By contrast, "jus soli" is just some abstract Latin to the average person. And it is easily rebutted as a "Magic Dirt" concept.Replies: @Opinionator
-Trump can’t sign bills that don’t exist into law.
- DREAM Act is a priority because smart conservatives recognize it’s an opportunity to extract conservative changes to immigration that would never pass on its own.
-Again eVerify needs congressional action and who knows may end up in this deal. Birthright citizenship? This shows you’re not practical but just foaming at the mouth with impotent rage. Any birthright law would be tied up in the courts the minute Trump put down his pen to sign the law.
Trump really is too good for most of the lot on here.
A wall is workong for Israel. Why can’t one have benefits for us.
1/ US has lots of islands. Israel has none.
2/ US has dozens (hundreds?) of major international airports. Israel has one.
3/ A Mexican wall would not touch the very long Canadian border. There is no equivalent for Israel.
4/ The US has a seacoast infinitely longer than Israel's.Replies: @Opinionator, @Polynikes, @Maj. Kong, @Anonymous, @Autochthon
Everyone should try to use and spread the “generous offer” or “extremely generous offer” description of this proposal. Implant the phrase into the public’s consciousness.
“President Trump’s extremely generous offer”
OR
“President Trump’s generous offer”
"President Trump's hugely generous offer"
Guitierrez has a good idea. Let’s build some giant middle finger statues toward Latin America, in addition to the wall. Back in 2001 it was a popular idea that we rebuild the twin towers as two middle fingers. Unfortunately, we never went through with that. But now we get another chance. Paging Senator Kid Rock….
Second point: Sad that the dems are being allowed to complain about the 20… “BILLION” dollars. Like they are all of the sudden fiscal hawks? That’s 0.5% of the federal budget. Republicans should be calling this out. President Trump could start tweeting all the things the federal government spends >20 billion on each year. I bet Schumer and Durban have personally sponsored some bills that spend 20 billion on terrible shit.
If the democrats reject the Trump proposal, which grants amnesty to 2 million illegal aliens in return for building a wall along our southern border it will hurt them politically. Hopefully the immigration legislation is held up so it becomes a campaign issue in November…would help the republicans pick up some Senate seats and retain the house majority.
would be interesting to see it fail in congress with most of the democrats voting against the Trump bill. But it will probably never be put up for a vote. The GOP establishment wants amnesty for 7 million and no wall, Ryan and McConnell would never allow congress to vote on legislation which funds the wall.
http://thebiglead.com/2018/01/25/espn-exploring-sale-of-fivethirtyeight/
I wonder it it's really ESPN wanting to streamline and try to avoid being too 'political' (it's a bit late for that), or 538 jumping off a sinking ship.
Let us pray that this is where we are heading into the fall. Let the American voter decide.
--No immigration restriction legislation has been signed into law
--The mass migration of foreigners into our country continues apace
--The highest priority in the public sphere is a DACA amnesty
--eVerify and birthright citizenship aren't even on the president's radarReplies: @Rod1963, @Noah172, @Maj. Kong, @Jack Hanson, @Ed
You realize that the GOP leadership opposes all his immigration objectives and that McConnell has tabled over 200 pieces of legislation sent to him by the House so the Senate doesn’t have to vote on it.
The real source of evil is McConnell. He needs to go but Trump won’t say shit about the anti-American POS.
He is probably the most corrupt and vile man ever to walk the Earth.
The guy who does that is known to prefer veal to beef, it’s an open secret and was spelled out somewhere I have lost the citation for, and besides getting kids to swear is an old “corrupting” trick. He’s Italianate flatbread out in the open and it’s as tolerated as Weinstein used to be. What normal adult enjoys watching kids gratuitously misbehaving?
I would be angrier about this proposal, which is lousy on the merits, if it had a chance of becoming law. If it wakes up some normies to the extremism of the Democrats, it might be worth the heartburn on the right. I am disappointed in people like Mark Krikorian and Mickey Kaus and Ann Coulter who only see the proposal as terrible (which it is, when considered in isolation) but who don’t see the value in exposing the insanity of the left.
This incident reminds me of the 2000 Camp David summit between President Clinton, Ehud Barak, and Yasser Arafat. Barak made the most generous offer ever from an Israeli: a Palestinian state with all the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem (the last a painful concession for Jews, and would have gotten Barak assassinated like Rabin had it come to fruition). Arafat said no FTMP because of what was omitted: a right of return for the Palestinian diaspora — his version of electing a new people. Arafat’s refusal, and the intifada that started soon after, convinced many Israelis that the Palestinians can never be reasoned with (the Israeli left has never really recovered from 2000-01).
If Trump’s DACA negotiating convinces millions of white normies that the Democrats are not and will never be reasonable on immigration (redpills them, basically), Trump will deserve credit for a bold, risky move with generational payoff.
Trump should take the Democrats hysterical rejection as license to say, “To hell with it. They’re all going back.”
That’s the good spin. I hope it’s the right spin.
If cut off from the US tit, Israel might or might not survive. If the modern IDF were what it was under Dayan, their chances would be fairly good. Today, who knows.
The political power of Jews and God-Damned Rapture Bunnies in the US means that so long as the US prospers, the money and weapons will flow to Israel. The US as a sovereign single nation is safe in the short term, but terminal in the long term. If you're under, say, 25 and live to be 80, you'll see the outcome. I probably won't.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
Some of them are more than just “slavish loyalists.” I believe we’re dealing with all-out trolls, particularly those IHTG and Hansen bots.
Trump’s “generous” offer is actually him losing the negotiation. Dems demonize him as a racist and he responds with a “I am not a racist see look at me do amnesty”…
He knew they’d turn it down, which was his plan all along.
--No immigration restriction legislation has been signed into law
--The mass migration of foreigners into our country continues apace
--The highest priority in the public sphere is a DACA amnesty
--eVerify and birthright citizenship aren't even on the president's radarReplies: @Rod1963, @Noah172, @Maj. Kong, @Jack Hanson, @Ed
– He needs Congress, controlled by cucks, to appropriate funds. And the Democrats have been waffling on the wall lately (they have voted for one in the past).
– No other Senator has co-sponsored the rather mild Cotton-Perdue bill. Hard to get from 2 to 60.
– The administration has been doing decent things through the executive branch (deportations, fewer refugees [far fewer Muslim refugees], holding up H1B applications and renewals, fighting for the travel restriction in court [already won once with Supremes]).
-DACA is the only thing to offer the Democrats to get them to consider restrictionist measures without offering up the whole illegal population. It also forces them into these damaging govt shutdown antics.
-Legit criticism.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
The ball was in his court. He gave them an offer to refuse which gave them more than enough to look bad in front of their own base.
It has nothing to do with chess, but it sure does have a lot of j-street commenters in a fit. Bravo.
You suggest their coalition is fragile, but you forget the two party system plus antipathy for whites is good enough to ensure their position until the GOP officially dissolves and is replaced with the La Raza Party. Americans whistling last the graveyard on the idea that the diaspora can’t herd cats is not paying attention to their history.
The Coalition of the Fringes's internal divisions and contradictions are hilarious, but they are fiercely united in their hatred for white men of normal sexuality and, for the most part, their love of the white man's generous cradle-to-grave welfare hammock.
Your argument would make sense if Trump has succeeded in fulfilling his campaign promises and only failed to stab us in the back. The fact is Trump just hasn’t done much of anything in either category.
Chicken king Frank Purdue was brought into the cabinet by Trump! That industry runs on illegal labor.
There was never going to be any real workplace enforcement or deportations.
https://www.twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/956669072158154760Replies: @Maj. Kong, @Wilkey, @Travis
I thought “Denial” was the last stage of genocide.
OR
“President Trump’s hugely generous offer”
Its a moral perversion where you demonstrate your virtue by favoring the people you're least obligated to take care of.Replies: @Moral Stone
I would disagree with the “moral perversion” or “leap-frogging loyalties” angle because these Democrat immigration positions are so demonstrably self-serving. As Steve frequently says, they’re electing a new people that will vote to give them more power. Trying to understand their actions in the context of a moral code with intrinsic obligations to others is probably barking up the wrong tree.
Of course not, the left would never allow millions of white conservatives to naturalize in this country. They flipped out over an NBC report of birth tourism, while the ignored Chinese birth tourism is larger by an order of magnitude.
---
It is worth mentioning that there is no prospect of the demographics being restored to a favorable balance by European immigration. No European country has a fertility rate above replacement. Even if Russia could escape the sanctions, and raise TFR to 3 by 2025, there won't be much of a surplus.
White South Africans would also be ill-advised to move to the US; Argentina, Uruguay or Chile would probably be better choices.Replies: @Anonymous
--No immigration restriction legislation has been signed into law
--The mass migration of foreigners into our country continues apace
--The highest priority in the public sphere is a DACA amnesty
--eVerify and birthright citizenship aren't even on the president's radarReplies: @Rod1963, @Noah172, @Maj. Kong, @Jack Hanson, @Ed
I prefer the use of “jus soli”, as it gives a different semantic context than “birthright”. Birth is generally thought of as a positive thing, and “right” carries the tone of “civil rights”.
Birthright also happens to be the name of Sheldon Adelson’s sponsored vacations in Israel for Jewish teens.
By contrast, “jus soli” is just some abstract Latin to the average person. And it is easily rebutted as a “Magic Dirt” concept.
But anchor baby citizenship or birth tourism is probably better.Replies: @Maj. Kong
This incident reminds me of the 2000 Camp David summit between President Clinton, Ehud Barak, and Yasser Arafat. Barak made the most generous offer ever from an Israeli: a Palestinian state with all the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem (the last a painful concession for Jews, and would have gotten Barak assassinated like Rabin had it come to fruition). Arafat said no FTMP because of what was omitted: a right of return for the Palestinian diaspora -- his version of electing a new people. Arafat's refusal, and the intifada that started soon after, convinced many Israelis that the Palestinians can never be reasoned with (the Israeli left has never really recovered from 2000-01).
If Trump's DACA negotiating convinces millions of white normies that the Democrats are not and will never be reasonable on immigration (redpills them, basically), Trump will deserve credit for a bold, risky move with generational payoff.
Trump should take the Democrats hysterical rejection as license to say, "To hell with it. They're all going back."
That's the good spin. I hope it's the right spin.Replies: @Opinionator, @Opinionator, @Parsifal, @Anonymous
Citation needed.
Ahem
1/ US has lots of islands. Israel has none.
2/ US has dozens (hundreds?) of major international airports. Israel has one.
3/ A Mexican wall would not touch the very long Canadian border. There is no equivalent for Israel.
4/ The US has a seacoast infinitely longer than Israel’s.
The Wall is not aimed at preventing the individual migrant, but it does prevent using vehicles to transfer large groups and drugs.
I support increasing the capabilities of the Coast Guard, as well.
All of this can be easily paid for by eliminating Foreign Aid. We don't even need a remittance tax, though it would be a good idea.Replies: @AndrewR
Theirs keep blowing up.
Interesting how Durbin calls the proposed wall “ineffective.” Of course he has no idea whether it would be. Or maybe he does, and actually thinks it might work. But this has been the Democrat/Rino playbook since forever. Call the wall stupid and nonsensical and then fight like hell to make sure it never gets built.
- No other Senator has co-sponsored the rather mild Cotton-Perdue bill. Hard to get from 2 to 60.
- The administration has been doing decent things through the executive branch (deportations, fewer refugees [far fewer Muslim refugees], holding up H1B applications and renewals, fighting for the travel restriction in court [already won once with Supremes]).
-DACA is the only thing to offer the Democrats to get them to consider restrictionist measures without offering up the whole illegal population. It also forces them into these damaging govt shutdown antics.
-Legit criticism.Replies: @Opinionator
Congressional behavior is subject to public, media, and presidential pressure. Trump hasn’t gotten out there and led on this ever so crucial issue beyond firing off a few occasional tweets. There has been little engagement with and education of the voters. Little public pressure on people on his own party. He has the platform for it.
There is also little evidence the administration has given thought to using carrots such as tax reform or deregulation or Obamacare repeal to extract votes on immigration control from GOP lawmakers.
DACA is a good bargaining chip, yes, but the prominence and framing given it in the overall debate reflect a failure of public relations and strategy leadership on the part of Trump and the GOP. See above.
1/ US has lots of islands. Israel has none.
2/ US has dozens (hundreds?) of major international airports. Israel has one.
3/ A Mexican wall would not touch the very long Canadian border. There is no equivalent for Israel.
4/ The US has a seacoast infinitely longer than Israel's.Replies: @Opinionator, @Polynikes, @Maj. Kong, @Anonymous, @Autochthon
Um, so what?
1/ US has lots of islands. Israel has none.
2/ US has dozens (hundreds?) of major international airports. Israel has one.
3/ A Mexican wall would not touch the very long Canadian border. There is no equivalent for Israel.
4/ The US has a seacoast infinitely longer than Israel's.Replies: @Opinionator, @Polynikes, @Maj. Kong, @Anonymous, @Autochthon
And yet… the vast majority of illegal aliens come across the southern border where there is no wall
We have an inefficient entry-exit system.Replies: @Polynikes
Birthright also happens to be the name of Sheldon Adelson's sponsored vacations in Israel for Jewish teens.
By contrast, "jus soli" is just some abstract Latin to the average person. And it is easily rebutted as a "Magic Dirt" concept.Replies: @Opinionator
As between the two, I agree.
But anchor baby citizenship or birth tourism is probably better.
The left sees it as dehumanizing and borderline genocidal.
One of the dumbest concepts of come out of Black Lives Matter is "white fragility". It completely turns off run of the mill white lolbertarians concerned about the overreach of the police state. (I used to be one)Replies: @Anonymous
1/ US has lots of islands. Israel has none.
2/ US has dozens (hundreds?) of major international airports. Israel has one.
3/ A Mexican wall would not touch the very long Canadian border. There is no equivalent for Israel.
4/ The US has a seacoast infinitely longer than Israel's.Replies: @Opinionator, @Polynikes, @Maj. Kong, @Anonymous, @Autochthon
Walls have proven successful in Korea. Hungary has not built a “wall” but they do have essentially the same thing as what the “Secure Fence Act 2006” promised before the Dems gutted it.
The Wall is not aimed at preventing the individual migrant, but it does prevent using vehicles to transfer large groups and drugs.
I support increasing the capabilities of the Coast Guard, as well.
All of this can be easily paid for by eliminating Foreign Aid. We don’t even need a remittance tax, though it would be a good idea.
This incident reminds me of the 2000 Camp David summit between President Clinton, Ehud Barak, and Yasser Arafat. Barak made the most generous offer ever from an Israeli: a Palestinian state with all the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem (the last a painful concession for Jews, and would have gotten Barak assassinated like Rabin had it come to fruition). Arafat said no FTMP because of what was omitted: a right of return for the Palestinian diaspora -- his version of electing a new people. Arafat's refusal, and the intifada that started soon after, convinced many Israelis that the Palestinians can never be reasoned with (the Israeli left has never really recovered from 2000-01).
If Trump's DACA negotiating convinces millions of white normies that the Democrats are not and will never be reasonable on immigration (redpills them, basically), Trump will deserve credit for a bold, risky move with generational payoff.
Trump should take the Democrats hysterical rejection as license to say, "To hell with it. They're all going back."
That's the good spin. I hope it's the right spin.Replies: @Opinionator, @Opinionator, @Parsifal, @Anonymous
An otherwise good post.
If millions of Russians crossed the Arctic, would we just sit back as Merkel did during the 2015 invasion?
Of course not, the left would never allow millions of white conservatives to naturalize in this country. They flipped out over an NBC report of birth tourism, while the ignored Chinese birth tourism is larger by an order of magnitude.
—
It is worth mentioning that there is no prospect of the demographics being restored to a favorable balance by European immigration. No European country has a fertility rate above replacement. Even if Russia could escape the sanctions, and raise TFR to 3 by 2025, there won’t be much of a surplus.
White South Africans would also be ill-advised to move to the US; Argentina, Uruguay or Chile would probably be better choices.
Trump’s White House meeting with various Senators and politicians was actually a very shrewd move because by using non-binding arbitration if it were, it quickly smoked out all the players’ positions. It is important to realize that the various stakeholders who were present are really not in a position to negotiate away any of their interests, particularly over a bunch of DACA losers. They can’t negotiate away their coalition member’s interests either.
“Comprehensive Immigration Reform” is not an immigration plan. It is a coalition. It is a group of stakeholders, all representing various interests and have assembled a wish list of everything they want. Because they are an unpopular minority, their only hope is to hang together because if they don’t they will hang separately. As a consequence, no one in that room other than President Trump could compromise even the smallest concession. It was doomed to fall apart.
The ethnic interests assembled there might want a bunch of poorly educated eaters but the Ag Lobby, Chamber of Commerce, and HB-1 visa types could personally care less about them. By the same token, why would the Latino lobby care about HB-1 visas? The only reason is that if those are reduced then the integrity of the coalition will be diminished and with it the chances of getting their precious DACA losers green cards.
What Trump needs to do is fracture the coalition so he can deal with each constituency piecemeal. This is also why they can never give him even one thin dime to build a wall. It’s not about the money. My solution would be for him to start deporting the DACA bums and crowd fund the wall. The wall is would be much less effective than mandatory E-verify or biometric ID but it would destabilize his opponents making it easier to get the other things too.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
“So what precisely did Trump gain from proposing it to begin with?”
This is a point that people seem to be missing.
Dealing with illegal immigrants doesn’t require new legislation or permission from Congress, other than funding the relevant agencies, because illegal immigration is already illegal, by definition. Its just a matter of law enforcement, which is purely an executive branch preview.
It was obvious that Trump wouldn’t get a nationalist Congress and the Congressional leadership would be either GOP globalists, if not the Democrats who were predicted to have a Senate majority. However, for his supporters just electing him to head the executive branch still would have done some good since his signature issue, immigration, as mainly an executive branch issue.
And the DACA people are violating the law, so you don’t need a deal to start deporting them, you just have to wait until the current restrictions expire.
Where new legislation is needed is on restrictions on legal immigration. From what I can tell, the Trump Administration is attempting to trade continued lax enforcement on a sub-section of illegal immigrants in favor of more restricted legal immigration. This strikes me as a backwards way of doing things. Changes in the law don’t matter until you have confidence that they are going to be enforced. Shouldn’t Trump be trading something like the state and local tax deductions in return for proposed changes to immigration laws?
Yep. Any day now the flood of third-world immigration will reverse.
But seriously, some friendly advice: Don’t hold your breath.
This misunderstands how race works in Latin America-as a spectrum, and explicit in a way that Americans would have a hard time fathoming. The lefties are kidding themselves if they think their campesino migrants haven’t imbibed these societal attitudes. Upwardly mobile Hispanics will be thought of as white by their duskier skinned counterparts-and they’ll likely intermarry with whites. Moreover, poor Hispanics tend to have very tense relations with blacks, and vice versa. Intersectionality exists way more in the heads of college students than in the minorities they claim to uphold.
Mind, I fully agree that they’ve got a good shot at running out the clock until the GOP runs out of gas. But that’s more of a product of the GOP’s ineptitude than anything else, so I have trouble mustering much sympathy.
--Immediate termination of chain migration rather than a 17-year phase in
--Deeper cuts to merit-based immigration
--Mandatory eVerify
--End to birthright citizenship
But that's not what this proposal does.Replies: @Anonymous
Yes.
There’s one other thing that could be done in addition to all of this that would be extremely effective: Prohibit financial institutions from serving illegal aliens. The superstructure to do this is already there, post-9/11. The Patriot Act, FATCA, Know Your Customer, and other initiatives have effectively denied financial services to American expats. All that Treasury has to do is modify these regulations to apply to illegal aliens in the U.S.
No bank accounts or bank transfer services unless you’re a citizen, have an immigrant visa (i.e., green card), have a current nonimmigrant visa (money goes bye-bye if you don’t withdraw it by the expiration date of your visa), or are otherwise legally in the country (e.g., refugee and asylee applacants). This could be phased in to give banks time to ramp it up: new accounts and any account that has done an international money transfer are first in line.
The lack of financial services would make the U.S. a lot less attractive to illegal aliens, driving them to Bitcoin, perhaps, but Bitcoin providers are well regulated in the U.S. and obey Know Your Customer and other practices.
Finally, maybe it’s time for the Trump good cop, Nixon-in-China transition, where he declares that he loves illegal aliens and Mexico and taco bowls, and to make touchdown in their home countries as comfortable as possible for the returnees, he’s proposing that the U.S. provide foreign aid for job training, international schools, transistional housing, and whatever other needs our soon-to-be-gone 11 million may have in their home countries. Heck, pay them each a couple of thousand dollars on the way out to get out and stay out (after taking photos, fingerprints, iris scans, and DNA for future identification; we love you on the way out, but come back and there’s jail time). It’s worth the money, and cheaper in the long run to do it like this.
I saw that too.
I wonder it it’s really ESPN wanting to streamline and try to avoid being too ‘political’ (it’s a bit late for that), or 538 jumping off a sinking ship.
But anchor baby citizenship or birth tourism is probably better.Replies: @Maj. Kong
“Anchor baby” is the Confederate Flag of the Immigration debate.
The left sees it as dehumanizing and borderline genocidal.
One of the dumbest concepts of come out of Black Lives Matter is “white fragility”. It completely turns off run of the mill white lolbertarians concerned about the overreach of the police state. (I used to be one)
40% are visa overstays
We have an inefficient entry-exit system.
There's one other thing that could be done in addition to all of this that would be extremely effective: Prohibit financial institutions from serving illegal aliens. The superstructure to do this is already there, post-9/11. The Patriot Act, FATCA, Know Your Customer, and other initiatives have effectively denied financial services to American expats. All that Treasury has to do is modify these regulations to apply to illegal aliens in the U.S.
No bank accounts or bank transfer services unless you're a citizen, have an immigrant visa (i.e., green card), have a current nonimmigrant visa (money goes bye-bye if you don't withdraw it by the expiration date of your visa), or are otherwise legally in the country (e.g., refugee and asylee applacants). This could be phased in to give banks time to ramp it up: new accounts and any account that has done an international money transfer are first in line.
The lack of financial services would make the U.S. a lot less attractive to illegal aliens, driving them to Bitcoin, perhaps, but Bitcoin providers are well regulated in the U.S. and obey Know Your Customer and other practices.
Finally, maybe it's time for the Trump good cop, Nixon-in-China transition, where he declares that he loves illegal aliens and Mexico and taco bowls, and to make touchdown in their home countries as comfortable as possible for the returnees, he's proposing that the U.S. provide foreign aid for job training, international schools, transistional housing, and whatever other needs our soon-to-be-gone 11 million may have in their home countries. Heck, pay them each a couple of thousand dollars on the way out to get out and stay out (after taking photos, fingerprints, iris scans, and DNA for future identification; we love you on the way out, but come back and there's jail time). It's worth the money, and cheaper in the long run to do it like this.Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist, @Anonymous
That’s a very good post.
As an American expat who’s on the wrong side of that Banking Wall, I can confirm that your first idea is a good one. It would put a significant brake on illegals’ economic functions.
I think your second idea also has merit. It fits in well with the “Reverse the Colorful Countries’ Brain Drain!” and “Reunite Families in their Real Vibrant Homes” approaches to discouraging illegal immigration.
Physical walls — and physical presence — are important in turning the II tide, but much of the battle needs to be won in headspace, i.e. in the beliefs and opinions of both those thinking about entering the USA illegally, and in the minds of American citizens. Most of the latter, as Steve has been saying recently, have no idea how radical, how outrageous, their assumptions about what ‘immigration’ should be really are.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
He gains an immense amount.
I don’t usually go for the 11-dimensional chess business and here, I’m not even sure what his intentions are. But I can say that I’m kinda meh on the Trump’s policy, but as a proposal it’s great.
Specifically, it’s very important in politics to be able to say X have our intended audience hear us as X, instead of what they previously imagined of us. This is especially true of anything associated with Trump, which is going to be colored by Trump’s tweets regarding the failure of Mika Brezinski’s facelift or hush money to adult movie actresses.
For us, we need to be able to talk about the substance of the immigration issue without these distractions. Specifically, we need to be able to say a few things that aren’t usually mentioned.
1. For the Dreamers (and other illegal immigrants for that matter) they’ve already been here illegally 1, 5, 10 however many years and were brought here illegally to begin with. What’s the urgency in making them legal now? We don’t usually dwell on this because restrictionists simply want them deported. But there’s a lot of Americans who are comfortable by legalizing them in some fashion. Fine, why is it so important to do now.
2. We have to motivate our fellow Americans to assert our self-determination and defend the human capital of our citizens.
This proposal moves the ball forward on both counts. It may fail or it may succeed, but in contrast to some of Trump’s other communications, it’s clearly not a joke. This gives us the space to talk apples-to-apples with the American people in way where there’s legitimate hope that they will sympathetic to us.
Sadly, you are right. There’s a lot of self-delusion around here, especially since Nov 2016. The GOP is clearly obsolete but that in no way implies that its replacement(s) will be right-of-center.
Ridiculous to whom? Spend some time in the mass market for information–the MSM, FB, Twit, Google, Yahoo, you name it. The Democrats are heroes standing up for what’s right.
Echo chamber here.
I agree with the wall in principle, but not in practice.
How about addressing the Muslim problem first? These people usually come by airplane! (…Or through the crossings in Mexico and Canada, but very easy to profile.)
What’s going on in Washington isn’t a fight, it is patty-cake.
The Wall is not aimed at preventing the individual migrant, but it does prevent using vehicles to transfer large groups and drugs.
I support increasing the capabilities of the Coast Guard, as well.
All of this can be easily paid for by eliminating Foreign Aid. We don't even need a remittance tax, though it would be a good idea.Replies: @AndrewR
The wall would be an environmental disaster. Better to use the money to increase surveillance and immigration enforcement.
1/ US has lots of islands. Israel has none.
2/ US has dozens (hundreds?) of major international airports. Israel has one.
3/ A Mexican wall would not touch the very long Canadian border. There is no equivalent for Israel.
4/ The US has a seacoast infinitely longer than Israel's.Replies: @Opinionator, @Polynikes, @Maj. Kong, @Anonymous, @Autochthon
Also, Mexicans are really good with ladders, and Arabs aren’t.
Theirs keep blowing up.
Of course not, the left would never allow millions of white conservatives to naturalize in this country. They flipped out over an NBC report of birth tourism, while the ignored Chinese birth tourism is larger by an order of magnitude.
---
It is worth mentioning that there is no prospect of the demographics being restored to a favorable balance by European immigration. No European country has a fertility rate above replacement. Even if Russia could escape the sanctions, and raise TFR to 3 by 2025, there won't be much of a surplus.
White South Africans would also be ill-advised to move to the US; Argentina, Uruguay or Chile would probably be better choices.Replies: @Anonymous
Whoa, yet another upside to Global Warming!
There's one other thing that could be done in addition to all of this that would be extremely effective: Prohibit financial institutions from serving illegal aliens. The superstructure to do this is already there, post-9/11. The Patriot Act, FATCA, Know Your Customer, and other initiatives have effectively denied financial services to American expats. All that Treasury has to do is modify these regulations to apply to illegal aliens in the U.S.
No bank accounts or bank transfer services unless you're a citizen, have an immigrant visa (i.e., green card), have a current nonimmigrant visa (money goes bye-bye if you don't withdraw it by the expiration date of your visa), or are otherwise legally in the country (e.g., refugee and asylee applacants). This could be phased in to give banks time to ramp it up: new accounts and any account that has done an international money transfer are first in line.
The lack of financial services would make the U.S. a lot less attractive to illegal aliens, driving them to Bitcoin, perhaps, but Bitcoin providers are well regulated in the U.S. and obey Know Your Customer and other practices.
Finally, maybe it's time for the Trump good cop, Nixon-in-China transition, where he declares that he loves illegal aliens and Mexico and taco bowls, and to make touchdown in their home countries as comfortable as possible for the returnees, he's proposing that the U.S. provide foreign aid for job training, international schools, transistional housing, and whatever other needs our soon-to-be-gone 11 million may have in their home countries. Heck, pay them each a couple of thousand dollars on the way out to get out and stay out (after taking photos, fingerprints, iris scans, and DNA for future identification; we love you on the way out, but come back and there's jail time). It's worth the money, and cheaper in the long run to do it like this.Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist, @Anonymous
Aside from the fact that these ideas are complete nonstarters for political reasons, they were fun to read. But: try making some inroads in regard to public opinion, using the mechanisms for directing public opinion: the MSM, FB, etc. Until and unless you’re doing that, you’re just blowing smoke.
The left sees it as dehumanizing and borderline genocidal.
One of the dumbest concepts of come out of Black Lives Matter is "white fragility". It completely turns off run of the mill white lolbertarians concerned about the overreach of the police state. (I used to be one)Replies: @Anonymous
They control the language–hence they control the terms of debate.
Don’t accede to their mechanisms of control, not one bit more than you have to. Persist even and especially in the face of their apoplexy and histrionics–it’s necessary work and fun besides.
On one general-interest site I frequent it is forbidden even to imply that anyone is smarter, stronger, better-looking or more capable than anyone else. They call that racism. When they control the terms of the debate, the debate becomes patently ridiculous. Egg them on if necessary.
Waving the Southron Saltire in the face of a black person will:
A. Anger them
B. Increase the chance they vote Democrat
C. Increase the chance they vote GOP
D. Convince them of the glory of Southron Nationalism
When a Nice White Lady hears some crimethink she will:
A. Get personally offended at those who said it
B. Reconsider her worthless normie liberalism
C. Sit in shock
D. Increase the chance she votes Democrat and guilt-trips her husband into the same
Why does the left control the language:
A. They are smarter, because they have graduate degrees, and we barely passed HS
B. Conservatives are dupes that fall for their traps
C. They physically own the major media institutions
D. They don't, the God-Emperor nimbly navigated around them
I’m not saying it couldn’t have any benefits. But the benefits likely would be far outweighed by the costs. That money could be used far more wisely and effectively.
And Tillerson announced permanent troops in Syria...
Today the mask really slipped. If Trump had 70% approval he would amnesty all 30million.
Remember: Pumping the economy from 2004-2008 didn't make America great again...Replies: @El Dato
Plus a few more horror stories, including a “more nukes” program that no-one needs, wants or can even handle (not enough manpower lol).
It’s like no-one even cares anymore.
There are two parallel action plots nowadays:
1) Levels of politicking, grandstanding and aimless clownery on a level that even Pinochet would hesistate to aerodrop persons involved into the ocean out of concern that this might lead to extreme levels of oceanic pollution.
2) Deep State / MIC / Zionist League of America steaming on like a possessed muscle car fueled by printed “money” doing whatever it well likes.
It’s like the heady feel before the Internet Bubble Pop again. Like, just before.
One weapons system uses a vacuum tube as part of the weak link/strong link surety system. This is not an off the shelf tube but is a purpose built ruggedized affair. They were made in house at Bendix plants in Red Bank, NJ and in Kansas City. They needed specialized trades once common to the vacuum tube trade like grid lathe mechanics. Once common, these people are now almost all dead or senescent. (The tube industry quit training them in the mid to late sixties, meaning even though US companies made receiving and small transmitting tube types into the eighties, they were running with people nearing retirement then. One company bought up almost all the closing US plants and proceeded to scrap a lot of the machines and destroy much of the documentation, and exported much of the rest. (A lot of US and European tube equipment wound up in the former Soviet Union and China before the wall came down, even in the height of the Cold war. Ponder that.)
US companies still make medium to large transmitting tubes, X ray tubes, and a few thyratrons and such, but those do not use the same type of internals as small types.
When it comes to actual nuclear physics package stuff, the same phenomenon exists. Turning a plutonium pit requires specific machining skills used no where else and when they shut Rocky Flats down, there was no one doing this type of work left. If we need to do this again the startup training costs will be fantastic. Weapons use a lot of weird and unique materials, which is why the plant in Kansas City had more different and unique manufacturing processes than under any other single roof in the world.
When the full history of US weapons manufacture is written and released (which won't be in my lifetime), it will be a fascinating story, and will probably closely track the history of US manufacturing in general.
https://www.twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/956669072158154760Replies: @Maj. Kong, @Wilkey, @Travis
Yglesias: ‘The speed with which the whole GOP apparatus has come to accept a 50% cut in legal immigration as a reasonable idea is remarkable.”
Note that neither is initial post nor the 4 follow-up tweets mentions: 1) how many immigrants we already take in annually (~1.1 million, not counting illegals); 2) how many immigrants currently live here and what fraction of our current population they comprise (~46 million, 15%); or 3) how many anchor babies are born to non-citizens/illegals each year (a few hundred thousand).
Talking about ‘brutal cuts’ to immigration levels without telling/reminding the reader what those levels actually are is pretty much the standard when the Left discusses immigration.
Seems to me that Trump’s proposal was Steven Miller’s way of seizing the agenda away from the Senate “discussion group”. If it had produced a “bi-partisan” compromise, Trump would be faced with living up to his promise of signing whatever was put on his desk. The new proposal makes that promise no longer operative.
(Question)
Waving the Southron Saltire in the face of a black person will:
A. Anger them
B. Increase the chance they vote Democrat
C. Increase the chance they vote GOP
D. Convince them of the glory of Southron Nationalism
When a Nice White Lady hears some crimethink she will:
A. Get personally offended at those who said it
B. Reconsider her worthless normie liberalism
C. Sit in shock
D. Increase the chance she votes Democrat and guilt-trips her husband into the same
Why does the left control the language:
A. They are smarter, because they have graduate degrees, and we barely passed HS
B. Conservatives are dupes that fall for their traps
C. They physically own the major media institutions
D. They don’t, the God-Emperor nimbly navigated around them
Trump should declare a national emergency due to a foreign invasion, tell the 9th circuit court to get stuffed, activate the national guard of the fifty states, and round up all illegal aliens for deportation. If Antifa protests, turn them into giblets and pink mist.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
No doubt, Trump knew the Dems would reject it.
They did and that’s what he ‘gained’.
Take this, Berty:
Muslims are the least of your problems. You have a mexican/chinese/indian immigration problem.
Echo chamber here.Replies: @Desiderius, @ben tillman
Mass markets are so 1970s.
This incident reminds me of the 2000 Camp David summit between President Clinton, Ehud Barak, and Yasser Arafat. Barak made the most generous offer ever from an Israeli: a Palestinian state with all the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem (the last a painful concession for Jews, and would have gotten Barak assassinated like Rabin had it come to fruition). Arafat said no FTMP because of what was omitted: a right of return for the Palestinian diaspora -- his version of electing a new people. Arafat's refusal, and the intifada that started soon after, convinced many Israelis that the Palestinians can never be reasoned with (the Israeli left has never really recovered from 2000-01).
If Trump's DACA negotiating convinces millions of white normies that the Democrats are not and will never be reasonable on immigration (redpills them, basically), Trump will deserve credit for a bold, risky move with generational payoff.
Trump should take the Democrats hysterical rejection as license to say, "To hell with it. They're all going back."
That's the good spin. I hope it's the right spin.Replies: @Opinionator, @Opinionator, @Parsifal, @Anonymous
It *is* the right spin but don’t expect the bed-wetting brigade to concede this point.
This is hardly a rejection: This is a negotiation stance. The Dems have achieved a foot in the door, and they know it.
It's like no-one even cares anymore.
There are two parallel action plots nowadays:
1) Levels of politicking, grandstanding and aimless clownery on a level that even Pinochet would hesistate to aerodrop persons involved into the ocean out of concern that this might lead to extreme levels of oceanic pollution.
2) Deep State / MIC / Zionist League of America steaming on like a possessed muscle car fueled by printed "money" doing whatever it well likes.It's like the heady feel before the Internet Bubble Pop again. Like, just before.Replies: @Anonymous
The nuke weapons maintenance and manufacturing establishment is running into the problem that the skills needed to do the work they need to do have atrophied and in some cases are nonexistent. In some cases they have found retirees and brought them back to show how certain tasks are done, but in some cases the retirees are all dead or senile and in some cases the retirees have told them no.
One weapons system uses a vacuum tube as part of the weak link/strong link surety system. This is not an off the shelf tube but is a purpose built ruggedized affair. They were made in house at Bendix plants in Red Bank, NJ and in Kansas City. They needed specialized trades once common to the vacuum tube trade like grid lathe mechanics. Once common, these people are now almost all dead or senescent. (The tube industry quit training them in the mid to late sixties, meaning even though US companies made receiving and small transmitting tube types into the eighties, they were running with people nearing retirement then. One company bought up almost all the closing US plants and proceeded to scrap a lot of the machines and destroy much of the documentation, and exported much of the rest. (A lot of US and European tube equipment wound up in the former Soviet Union and China before the wall came down, even in the height of the Cold war. Ponder that.)
US companies still make medium to large transmitting tubes, X ray tubes, and a few thyratrons and such, but those do not use the same type of internals as small types.
When it comes to actual nuclear physics package stuff, the same phenomenon exists. Turning a plutonium pit requires specific machining skills used no where else and when they shut Rocky Flats down, there was no one doing this type of work left. If we need to do this again the startup training costs will be fantastic. Weapons use a lot of weird and unique materials, which is why the plant in Kansas City had more different and unique manufacturing processes than under any other single roof in the world.
When the full history of US weapons manufacture is written and released (which won’t be in my lifetime), it will be a fascinating story, and will probably closely track the history of US manufacturing in general.
This incident reminds me of the 2000 Camp David summit between President Clinton, Ehud Barak, and Yasser Arafat. Barak made the most generous offer ever from an Israeli: a Palestinian state with all the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem (the last a painful concession for Jews, and would have gotten Barak assassinated like Rabin had it come to fruition). Arafat said no FTMP because of what was omitted: a right of return for the Palestinian diaspora -- his version of electing a new people. Arafat's refusal, and the intifada that started soon after, convinced many Israelis that the Palestinians can never be reasoned with (the Israeli left has never really recovered from 2000-01).
If Trump's DACA negotiating convinces millions of white normies that the Democrats are not and will never be reasonable on immigration (redpills them, basically), Trump will deserve credit for a bold, risky move with generational payoff.
Trump should take the Democrats hysterical rejection as license to say, "To hell with it. They're all going back."
That's the good spin. I hope it's the right spin.Replies: @Opinionator, @Opinionator, @Parsifal, @Anonymous
Arafat’s refusal had much to do with the fact that he would have been killed had he tried to implement it. Israel vs. The Palestinians is a zero sum and irresolvable conflict, given that both sides want the same land (and no other), exclusively, and believe their tribal god has not only permitted but mandated they do so. There is no “good” or “fair” solution. One or the other will win. So far, the Pals have not shown the most smarts, but they correctly hate the US for unquestioningly supporting Israel.
If cut off from the US tit, Israel might or might not survive. If the modern IDF were what it was under Dayan, their chances would be fairly good. Today, who knows.
The political power of Jews and God-Damned Rapture Bunnies in the US means that so long as the US prospers, the money and weapons will flow to Israel. The US as a sovereign single nation is safe in the short term, but terminal in the long term. If you’re under, say, 25 and live to be 80, you’ll see the outcome. I probably won’t.
--No immigration restriction legislation has been signed into law
--The mass migration of foreigners into our country continues apace
--The highest priority in the public sphere is a DACA amnesty
--eVerify and birthright citizenship aren't even on the president's radarReplies: @Rod1963, @Noah172, @Maj. Kong, @Jack Hanson, @Ed
“Why can’t the President be a King!”, demanded Opionator as he stomped his foot.
There are some people here with a very pathological need to constantly be a victim.
We have an inefficient entry-exit system.Replies: @Polynikes
If that system wasn’t fixed after 9-11, I have little hope of it improving much.
Trump’s game plan should be-
Let this current proposal crash and burn at the hands of the Dems who are unwilling to compromise and thus wake-up more ‘normies’ to their sheer fanaticism/extremism on population the displacement/replacement issue.
-Push for a standalone funding bill for the wall where ALL its funding comes from taxing remittances sent out of the country, keeping true to his promise to ‘make Mexico pay for it’ (why he hasn’t yet proposed this is beyond me) Plus he can say to the Dems who claim it’ll be ineffective ‘Whadda you care anyways? It’s not like it’s being payed for by US taxpayers!’
-Wait for the Supreme Court’s decision on the ‘travel ban’ due out this June. If they uphold his authority under US code 1182 then he should use his power to indefinitely suspend the Diversity Visa and the chain migration of non-nuclear family members.
US code 1182 states ‘Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, the president may, by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.’
WorldStar?
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
Conceding the existing illegal aliens enrolled in DACA, I can see – if it is tied to a bunch of other real immigration restrictionist proposals. I don’t agree with it, but I can understand it. But why did Trump start by more than doubling the number who would be granted amnesty? How is that a good bargaining position? Those 2 million (and their children, and thier children) will be forever. Funding for a wall is all well and good for the next two years, but a subsequent Congress could rescind them. And it makes no sense to phase in the real important provisions (an end to chain migration and the diversity lottery). If they are diminished but still in place, it would be easy for a Democratic administration to fill them out again; it would be harder to start anew.
Support for restricting immigration is soft in the Republican party, especially in the Senate – why give those bastards any excuse to cuck out on the deal. Immigration reform (and by reform, I mean restriction) should not be tied to DACA anyway. And the Republicans shouldn’t let the Democrats tie it to DACA.
1/ US has lots of islands. Israel has none.
2/ US has dozens (hundreds?) of major international airports. Israel has one.
3/ A Mexican wall would not touch the very long Canadian border. There is no equivalent for Israel.
4/ The US has a seacoast infinitely longer than Israel's.Replies: @Opinionator, @Polynikes, @Maj. Kong, @Anonymous, @Autochthon
Let me guess: The America’s coast is literally infinitely longer than Israel’s?
Buy a dictionary.
Make ‘em an offer they can’t accept.
https://www.twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/956669072158154760Replies: @Maj. Kong, @Wilkey, @Travis
Yglesias is lying…The Trump plan will not reduce Legal immigration. Prohibiting people from sponsoring parents just changes who will obtain green cards. It will not reduce the number of immigrants admitted…already we greatly restrict the number we admit each year…for example, my wife became a citizen in 2001 and immediately sponsored her Mother and youngest brother…2 years later her 61 year-old mother was given a Green card…5 years later her College educated brother obtained a green card. (he decided to stay in Chile)
The current policy gives preference to parents, spouses and children but not siblings….the new policy will result in more younger immigrants, as parents will not be eligible..Legal immigration will remain well over 1 million per year. The 50,000 diversity lottery visas will be distributed to more skilled applicants…no change in the number of immigrants. Wish he did limit Legal immigration to 950,000 per year, to make it clear there would be little change and force the democrats to discuss why 1.2 million is better than 1 million per year.
Let me address this issue, speaking as a liberal Democrat who is extremely disappointed with the current leadership of the Democratic Party.
I think 538.com is the source for the polls I am about to quote.
What bothers me the most about the current tribalistic American politics is this: these days, liberals are almost required to believe A, B, C, and ~X, ~Y and ~Z, while conservatives are almost required to believe ~A, ~B, ~C and X, Y, Z.
A few years ago, Democrats were almost evenly split on whether the US should construct a secure border wall.
Now, Democrats almost unanimously OPPOSE a border wall.
Why is that? Have the engineering skills needed to construct such a wall changed? Have the merits of having or not having a wall changed?
No, and no.
What has changed — Trump is favor of a wall. Trump is evil, therefore the wall is evil. Trump is for it, so all good liberals MUST be against it.
Simple as that.
It’s time for Trump to stop tearing families apart, that is cruel.
Send them all back!
The argument that they’ve been here since children should be answered with: that’s right, they’ve mooched off America long enough. It’s time to end the gravy train. The parents are also child traffickers. Either all go back or they can all go to jail. Stop pussyfooting around this BS. Freedom at home, or jail in America. Take your pick.
RAISE act, and full deportation. Nothing less.
A reminder: the Institutional Revolutionary Party was in power for 71 years in Mexico, 1929-2000, tossed out and voted back in in 2012.
Mexico is essentially a one party state. That’s what the democrats (and the Bushes, apparently) long for.
Either way, the Chinese and East Indians come by airplane also. This needs to be addressed.
The real source of evil is McConnell. He needs to go but Trump won't say shit about the anti-American POS.
He is probably the most corrupt and vile man ever to walk the Earth.Replies: @nebulafox
McConnell, apart from being a living example of physiognomy, unquestionably is the enemy of anybody that thinks the GOP’s primary function should be something other than giving grifting donors massive tax breaks. He’s also a POS. Regrettably, he’s not up for re-election until 2020.
Marginalizing him is difficult, but possible. However, that would require a capacity for long-term strategic planning and work Trump simply doesn’t have.
What bothers me the most about the current tribalistic American politics is this: these days, liberals are almost required to believe A, B, C, and ~X, ~Y and ~Z, while conservatives are almost required to believe ~A, ~B, ~C and X, Y, Z. A few years ago, Democrats were almost evenly split on whether the US should construct a secure border wall. Now, Democrats almost unanimously OPPOSE a border wall.Why is that? Have the engineering skills needed to construct such a wall changed? Have the merits of having or not having a wall changed?No, and no.What has changed -- Trump is favor of a wall. Trump is evil, therefore the wall is evil. Trump is for it, so all good liberals MUST be against it. Simple as that.Replies: @nebulafox
A mirror image of what happened with Republicans on Obama and ACA: largely indistinguishable from Mitt Romney’s plans as Massachusetts governor and a massive gift for trial lawyers (a traditional and quite parasitical GOP constituency).
Radicalization begets counter-radicalization…
Echo chamber here.Replies: @Desiderius, @ben tillman
That’s not what I see.
Wow. The White Genocide Party is really really terrified of a big beautiful wall.
President Trump won bigly here. He offered the WGP a deal that in itself could lead to one-party WGP rule within a decade, but the WGP said no, they want one-party hegemony NOW!!!!
They’re tantruming like spoiled infantile brats, just like their DACA schemers tantrum and huff every time they’re in front of a camera.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
“So what precisely did Trump gain from proposing it to begin with?”
He made the White Genocide Party look like petty, unreasonable obstructionists. He won.
“You suggest their coalition is fragile, but you forget the two party system plus antipathy for whites is good enough to ensure their position until the GOP officially dissolves and is replaced with the La Raza Party.”
The Coalition of the Fringes’s internal divisions and contradictions are hilarious, but they are fiercely united in their hatred for white men of normal sexuality and, for the most part, their love of the white man’s generous cradle-to-grave welfare hammock.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
Only on this comment board is an immigration bill which offers amnesty but no liberal will support is denounced as a betrayal by Trump.
Again some of you all are think your immigration restriction fantasies are viable policies that have any chance of becoming law. The GOP can’t get restrictionist stuff passed among their own caucus let alone getting Dems on board. By presenting this bill he shows how unreasonable the Dems are to the American people. Also makes it easier to let DACA expire and deport if it comes to that.
I swear what do you types think would have happened if Clinton or any other GOP candidate had won? We’d be staring at a full on DREAM Act with nothing in exchange. By all means though bash us that see reason as Trump sychophants.
You're right. These are not serious people.
--No immigration restriction legislation has been signed into law
--The mass migration of foreigners into our country continues apace
--The highest priority in the public sphere is a DACA amnesty
--eVerify and birthright citizenship aren't even on the president's radarReplies: @Rod1963, @Noah172, @Maj. Kong, @Jack Hanson, @Ed
-The security fence needs to be funded by Congress.
-Trump can’t sign bills that don’t exist into law.
– DREAM Act is a priority because smart conservatives recognize it’s an opportunity to extract conservative changes to immigration that would never pass on its own.
-Again eVerify needs congressional action and who knows may end up in this deal. Birthright citizenship? This shows you’re not practical but just foaming at the mouth with impotent rage. Any birthright law would be tied up in the courts the minute Trump put down his pen to sign the law.
Trump really is too good for most of the lot on here.
It’s a moving goalpost issue. Trump tricked the Dems into taking a stand. Then he gave them everything they asked for and more. Now, they are going to have to back out of that position; a tacit admission that Dreamers were never the goal to begin with. The Dems will have to back future immigration instead of the Dreamers. A nice wedge to gnaw at. I would expect the “Dems have abandoned the Dreamers” rhetoric to begin shortly. If it doesn’t, I may have to start it myself. But then if it were up to me I would begin the family reunification plan immediately – ship them all back home. Together, as a family.
That’s just DR3, version 2.0—Democrats are the real restrictionists. It isn’t going to fly. The Democrats are the race replacement party and the Nightmares know on which side their bread is buttered. At this point, the hermeneutic of 4D chess is particularly stupid and, for God’s sake, must be abandoned as soon as possible.
Sorry. I will adopt your untenable all or nothing stance immediately.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
ProTip:
They’re DNC or Dem or post-Dem PR drones mostly.
The rest are bots.
That’s neither “misbehaving” nor truly “enjoyment.”
“At this point, the hermeneutic of 4D chess is particularly stupid and, for God’s sake, must be abandoned as soon as possible.”
Sorry. I will adopt your untenable all or nothing stance immediately.
Again some of you all are think your immigration restriction fantasies are viable policies that have any chance of becoming law. The GOP can’t get restrictionist stuff passed among their own caucus let alone getting Dems on board. By presenting this bill he shows how unreasonable the Dems are to the American people. Also makes it easier to let DACA expire and deport if it comes to that.
I swear what do you types think would have happened if Clinton or any other GOP candidate had won? We’d be staring at a full on DREAM Act with nothing in exchange. By all means though bash us that see reason as Trump sychophants.Replies: @Jack Hanson
There are people here who think bunkers manned by the NG shooting any illegal who survives the minefield is a reasonable and realistic solution.
You’re right. These are not serious people.
Cue all the slavish Trump loyalists ensuring me that this is actually an intricate game of 9th dimensional chess.Replies: @Opinionator, @Daniel Chieh, @Felix..., @Issac, @eD, @Boethiuss, @Wally, @Mr. Anon, @Je Suis Omar Mateen, @Ed, @Olorin, @Jack Hanson
Betty how many times have you cried about a doom that never came?
The current policy gives preference to parents, spouses and children but not siblings....the new policy will result in more younger immigrants, as parents will not be eligible..Legal immigration will remain well over 1 million per year. The 50,000 diversity lottery visas will be distributed to more skilled applicants...no change in the number of immigrants. Wish he did limit Legal immigration to 950,000 per year, to make it clear there would be little change and force the democrats to discuss why 1.2 million is better than 1 million per year.Replies: @Opinionator
Good post. Thank you for the insight, however discouraging it is.
Wouldn’t that require either a constitutional amendment or the undoing of years and years worth of judicial interpretation?
They did and that's what he 'gained'.
Take this, Berty:
https://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/styles/inline_image_desktop/public/inline-images/20180118_farce.jpg?itok=UAcRKyAqReplies: @EdwardM
I wonder if the cartoonist had to use a generic white male as the press secretary because if he drew the actual press secretary, she would come across as cartoonish, er, overweight, and that he would be called sexist, fat-shaming, etc. Actually, if he tried to draw her realistically, he’d be accused fat-shaming, and he if made her look thin, he’d also be accused of fat-shaming and weight-washing. In any event, that all would become the focus of the cartoon.