Lets just dispense already with the false notion that sanctuary cities, their administrators and supporters have any bargaining power on this issue. They have no ground to stand on. They are operating against the law. Start arresting sanctuary city mayors, sanctuary state governors, make these faggots and their supporters understand that they are not in charge, that they don't have the authority to set immigration policy.
Lets just dispense already with the false notion that sanctuary cities, their administrators and supporters have any bargaining power on this issue. They have no ground to stand on. They are operating against the law. Start arresting sanctuary city mayors, sanctuary state governors, make these faggots and their supporters understand that they are not in charge, that they don't have the authority to set immigration policy.
Immigration is federal law, enforced by and with federal resources. It has nothing to do with states or cities. You didn’t know that?
California has important work going on helping lead the world, and we choose not to waste our resources on trumpian foolishness.
Lets just dispense already with the false notion that sanctuary cities, their administrators and supporters have any bargaining power on this issue. They have no ground to stand on. They are operating against the law. Start arresting sanctuary city mayors, sanctuary state governors, make these faggots and their supporters understand that they are not in charge, that they don't have the authority to set immigration policy.
Immigration is federal law, enforced by and with federal resources. It has nothing to do with states or cities. You didn’t know that?
California has important work going on helping lead the world, and we choose not to waste our resources on trumpian foolishness.
When you start punishing businesses for complying with federal immigration law among other things, you have inserted yourself into the conversation, and it won't end well for you. California has zero rights when it comes to setting immigration policy. When you start making laws that get in the way of enforcing deportations, you're going to be dealt with.
Lets just dispense already with the false notion that sanctuary cities, their administrators and supporters have any bargaining power on this issue. They have no ground to stand on. They are operating against the law. Start arresting sanctuary city mayors, sanctuary state governors, make these faggots and their supporters understand that they are not in charge, that they don't have the authority to set immigration policy.
Immigration is federal law, enforced by and with federal resources. It has nothing to do with states or cities. You didn’t know that?
California has important work going on helping lead the world, and we choose not to waste our resources on trumpian foolishness.
When you start punishing businesses for complying with federal immigration law among other things, you have inserted yourself into the conversation, and it won't end well for you. California has zero rights when it comes to setting immigration policy. When you start making laws that get in the way of enforcing deportations, you're going to be dealt with.
Hey cuntface.
I'm about to hire a couple employees that are illegal.
Apparently many on the left are up in arms with the NY Times and starting an #unsubscribe movement, for allowing one of their token center-right, Never Trumpers, Ross Douthat to publish the following op-ed. I swear to god these whackos are drive my cuck ass into the arms of the Troomps.
Because #fakeconservative @oregonblitzkrieg has used up his monthly allotment of 10 free articles from the New York Times, I decided to cut and past in TL, DR format. You're welcome!
"After 12 years of failed attempts at immigration reform, the current round of negotiations are turning on a strangely personalized question: When a deal is being made, should Stephen Miller be at the table?
Miller is the White House’s point man for immigration policy (and for strange and strident encounters with the press). He is also an immigration restrictionist: He wants a policy that favors skills-based recruitment over extended families, and he wants a lower immigration rate overall. He says he’s concerned about assimilation and crime and native wages; his critics say he just wants to keep America as white as possible, and that by even bringing him to meetings Trump is making a deal impossible to reach.
The critics are right about this much: Having someone like Miller involved is a change from the way prior immigration negotiations have proceeded. As Jim Antle points out in a column for The Week, those negotiations have been consistently bipartisan, bringing together John McCain and Ted Kennedy, Marco Rubio and Chuck Schumer, now Lindsey Graham and Dick Durbin — but “they have mostly taken place between people who are fundamentally in agreement on immigration,” who favor both amnesty for illegal immigrants and reforms that would probably increase immigration rates.
The problem with this approach is that it doesn’t represent the actual divisions in the country. Americans have become more pro-immigration since the 1990s, but there is still a consistent pattern when you ask about immigration rates: About a third of Americans favor the current trend, slightly fewer want higher rates, and about a third, like Miller, want immigration reduced.
And there are various reasonable grounds on which one might favor a reduction. The foreign-born share of the U.S. population is near a record high, and increased diversity and the distrust it sows have clearly put stresses on our politics. There are questions about how fast the recent wave of low-skilled immigrants is assimilating, evidence that constant new immigration makes it harder for earlier arrivals to advance, and reasons to think that a native working class gripped by social crisis might benefit from a little less wage competition for a while. California, the model for a high-immigration future, is prosperous and dynamic — but also increasingly stratified by race, with the same inequality-measuring Gini coefficient as Honduras. Hi @CirrhosisDawg
With that said, JAKE BROWNING SUCKS illegal immigration has slowed over the last decade, and immigration’s potential economic and humanitarian benefits are still considerable. And it’s also clear that many immigration restrictionists are influenced by simple bigotry — with the president’s recent excrement-related remarks a noteworthy illustration.
This bigotry, from the point of view of many immigration advocates, justifies excluding real restrictionists from the negotiating table. You can give them a little more money for border security, some promises about reducing illegal entry. But you can’t let them play a large role in shaping policy. The limits of this strategy, though, are evident in the repeated failure of “comprehensive” immigration reform over the last decade and more, doomed each time by the gulf between the plans of Republican negotiators and the actual preferences of their voters.
The present view of many liberals seems to be that restrictionists can eventually be steamrolled — that the same ethnic transformations that have made white anxiety acute will eventually bury white-identity politics with sheer multiethnic numbers.
But liberals have been waiting 12 years for that “eventually” to arrive, and instead Trump is president and the illegal immigrants they want to protect are still in limbo. So maybe it would be worth trying to actually negotiate with Stephen Miller, rather than telling Trump that he needs to lock his adviser in a filing cabinet, slap on a “beware of leopard” sign, and hustle out to the Rose Garden to sign whatever Durbin and Graham have hashed out.
Especially since last week, Trump and Miller actually made an interesting offer: an amnesty and even a path to citizenship for DACA recipients and other Dreamers, more generous than what many restrictionists favor and with no promise of the new E-Verify enforcements conservatives often seek, in return for a shift (over many years) to a skills-based policy and a somewhat lower immigration rate.
If you’re committed to the view that restrictionists can and must be steamrolled, you’ll respond to this offer the way many Democrats have — call it a “white supremacist ransom note,” punt on policy, and use the issue to rally your base in 2018.
But if you think that lasting deals are forged when all sides are represented, you might consider making a counteroffer: for instance, the same rough blueprint but with more green cards for skilled immigrants, so that Miller gets his cuts to low-skilled immigration but the overall rate stays closer to the status quo.
I don’t know if there’s a deal to be had along those lines; restrictionists might rebel and Democrats might simply not want a grand bargain with this president."
Douthat, Brett Stephens, Jonah Goldberg, David French, Kevin Williamson, David Frum, even Ben Shapiro and Erick Erickson, are doing great work as the bulwark of Never Trump — highlighting the disparity between supposed conservative policies and values and trump. Liberal backlash to them is the mirror image of trumpism.
Today’s Tug has been great to read. I always expect great insights from @YellowSnow. There’s also been interesting takes from Race and Salem.
Lots of vitriol however here though. I hate that! Thats why I’ve spent most of my time on the football board today. It’s the off-season and the only time I have any opening or opportunity to post there. We’re piling on DDY and his concerns about Garfield and Rainier beach high schools. Good shit.
Lets just dispense already with the false notion that sanctuary cities, their administrators and supporters have any bargaining power on this issue. They have no ground to stand on. They are operating against the law. Start arresting sanctuary city mayors, sanctuary state governors, make these faggots and their supporters understand that they are not in charge, that they don't have the authority to set immigration policy.
Immigration is federal law, enforced by and with federal resources. It has nothing to do with states or cities. You didn’t know that?
California has important work going on helping lead the world, and we choose not to waste our resources on trumpian foolishness.
When you start punishing businesses for complying with federal immigration law among other things, you have inserted yourself into the conversation, and it won't end well for you. California has zero rights when it comes to setting immigration policy. When you start making laws that get in the way of enforcing deportations, you're going to be dealt with.
Hey cuntface.
I'm about to hire a couple employees that are illegal.
I will everify and they will pass.
And I'm okay with it.
Bitchforks employees: Mexican prostitutes he pays for the right to use their tacos, because he can't get any legal USA pussy.
If Sanctuary cites were for the purpose of the local implementation of Jim Crow we would see a quick return to the Federalism this country is known for and fought a bloody civil war over.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
Lets just dispense already with the false notion that sanctuary cities, their administrators and supporters have any bargaining power on this issue. They have no ground to stand on. They are operating against the law. Start arresting sanctuary city mayors, sanctuary state governors, make these faggots and their supporters understand that they are not in charge, that they don't have the authority to set immigration policy.
Immigration is federal law, enforced by and with federal resources. It has nothing to do with states or cities. You didn’t know that?
California has important work going on helping lead the world, and we choose not to waste our resources on trumpian foolishness.
When you start punishing businesses for complying with federal immigration law among other things, you have inserted yourself into the conversation, and it won't end well for you. California has zero rights when it comes to setting immigration policy. When you start making laws that get in the way of enforcing deportations, you're going to be dealt with.
Hey cuntface.
I'm about to hire a couple employees that are illegal.
I will everify and they will pass.
And I'm okay with it.
Bitchforks employees: Mexican prostitutes he pays for the right to use their tacos, because he can't get any legal USA pussy.
Speaking of not being able to get any pussy....
I'm currently at a shitty local bar and hanging out with the bartender who finished her shift.
If Sanctuary cites were for the purpose of the local implementation of Jim Crow we would see a quick return to the Federalism this country is known for and fought a bloody civil war over.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
Thoughts of Gen. Sherman impleminting Federalism = BRB, YO for me. Am I right @tenndawg ?
If Sanctuary cites were for the purpose of the local implementation of Jim Crow we would see a quick return to the Federalism this country is known for and fought a bloody civil war over.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
Good news! 2018 Sanctuary cities are not for the purpose of implementing Jim Crow. No need to threaten to burn down cities. We’re all good.
If Sanctuary cites were for the purpose of the local implementation of Jim Crow we would see a quick return to the Federalism this country is known for and fought a bloody civil war over.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
Good news! 2018 Sanctuary cities are not for the purpose of implementing Jim Crow. No need to threaten to burn down cities. We’re all good.
Can't allow this slippery slope. Today its illegals tomorrow its Jim Crow
The democrats long love affair with States Rights going back to slavery can't be tolerated any longer
I still can't figure out what benefits mass illegal low skilled and non educated people are bringing.
Also didn't realize the Dems push back on everify. Not that it matters since every illegal has a fake social.
Since the democrats are the party of racism what they bring is simple, democratic votes! As the recently leaked DNC memo touts dreamers as the democrats key to winning future elections. Dem's have purchased votes since '64 and this is nothing new except that they wish to import those votes. Dem's in Kali are registering illegals to vote. That they want to bring i the poor is the key piece of information. They arrive poor and immediately go on government assistance and the dems always promise more free money and benefits and adds them to the democratic machines indentured voting block who's subsistence relies on those benefits. Why else would we have 7 generations of the same families on welfare etc. HTH
On some weird level, I've learned to like you a little bit, and I've accepted your xenophobia and thinly-veiled racism in the way I accept a lot of things in life.
But you calling the Democratic party the party of racists, in the spirit in which that term is normally used (as opposed to the twisted version of it that focuses on the focus on race as itself racist) is basically POTD, and not in a good way.
The paper hanging and the rhetoric have reached an all-time level now. Everyone wants votes. Of course the Ds use poor people for votes, just like right likes to re-draw voting districts for cartography fun and games. That means nothing to me either way.
But this drum beat of yours that the newly invented Republican party, which has absofuckinglutely sold its soul to (1) the religious fundies, (2) the poor white trash redneck belt, (3) the tin-foil hat crowd, is somehow keepin' in real for the Amurican Peeps is just too much fucking fun for one day.
The only thing left for me to determine is whether you & the other Breitbarts are (a) that fucking stupid and easily manipulated or (2) just absolutely fucking with me and the rest of the bored. I have my theory about OBK, and maybe Turd. You and and some of the other bananas are an open question.
Salem broh, meat OBK. OBK, meat Salem, my main CUOG!!!!!!!!
Salem thinks you're a low info voter and doesn't think the wall is a real thing.
Just wanted to make sure you two met.
You gonna take that shit from a Kewg OBK?
Salembrah, I personally don't see the need for invoking the C word. The guy wants a wall. It's ok to disagree, but Jeebus ... you go too far Kewg. You are my brother from a shared special needs mother, but come on ... I can't defend you when you act like this. It's TOO MUCH!
If Sanctuary cites were for the purpose of the local implementation of Jim Crow we would see a quick return to the Federalism this country is known for and fought a bloody civil war over.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
It would be great if President Pussy grew a pair and started arresting mayors like obk thinks he should. There are only a handful of large sanctuary cities. Round those fuckers up, and take them to Leavenworth.
Shouldn't be a problem for a street brawler like him. And his base will eat it up. obk will brb, yo until the cows come home.
I don't see it happening though. He'll just send out some really mean tweets.
If Sanctuary cites were for the purpose of the local implementation of Jim Crow we would see a quick return to the Federalism this country is known for and fought a bloody civil war over.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
It would be great if President Pussy grew a pair and started arresting mayors like obk thinks he should. There are only a handful of large sanctuary cities. Round those fuckers up, and take them to Leavenworth.
Shouldn't be a problem for a street brawler like him. And his base will eat it up. obk will brb, yo until the cows come home.
I don't see it happening though. He'll just send out some really mean tweets.
I don't see how it WOULD benefit our Country to give folks the boot who have been working, paying taxes and not breaking the law. If they stole someone's job when they got here, it's their's now and many of those employees wouldn't be replaced quickly. Meanwhile farmers, restaurants and hotels and creeps lawn are working shorthanded.
Trump actually has the balls to get something like this done. Give an amnesty plan to not just the DACA's but also the folks who have been here 10 or more years and fit the above stated criteria. But on the back end of this, there would be no more sanctuary cities and local and state law enforcement would need to cooperate and collaborate with ICE, Feds and Border Patrol to make illegals that don't fit the criteria to GTFO. I don't really care about the wall as that's just a rallying point for low info voter.
If he were to step up and do that, it would absolutely neuter the Democratic party for years.
Have to disagree. Rewarding lawlessness just encourages others to come and stay until another amnesty happens. Illegals should not get a shortcut in front of those lawfully trying to immigrate. The 3 million under Reagan was supposed to be the last.
If Sanctuary cites were for the purpose of the local implementation of Jim Crow we would see a quick return to the Federalism this country is known for and fought a bloody civil war over.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
It would be great if President Pussy grew a pair and started arresting mayors like obk thinks he should. There are only a handful of large sanctuary cities. Round those fuckers up, and take them to Leavenworth.
Shouldn't be a problem for a street brawler like him. And his base will eat it up. obk will brb, yo until the cows come home.
I don't see it happening though. He'll just send out some really mean tweets.
I think it's neat how he pretends he's not a pussy by posting videos of other people fighting.
It's kind of the same as you pretending you're not a worthless duck loving fuckstick by hanging out here.
@salemcoog is on the right track. The plan has to piss off the deport them all crowd and the open borders crowd.
People that are here doing the right thing should stay. Deadbeats and losers LEAVE. Border security now and forever including a tracking system for the visa over stay crowd that fly in.
Trump already offered to take the heat from the OBK crowd and Durbin panicked that it could happen
First off, Salem is a retard. I thought we had established that.
Secondly, the creep's take:
- People that are here doing the right thing should stay.
- For every brown person we deport for not doing the right thing, we deport 5 undesirable honkeys (or blicks or latinos or ___) who have at least one generation of citizenship behind them and who still can't figure it the fuck out despite their ridiculous advantages.
- Tighter border security, particularly for terrorist screening. It's HARD, but that's what matters. Not the beaners. Irrelevant.
- Within the strictures of tighter border security, let people in. It is fundamentally immoral to let in surgeons and not let in people who want to work their asses off and give their children a shot at the surgeon gig. Both are good for us; both are what built America.
I don't give a fuck about the rest. And let me be clear in my position: if you have a problem with my No. 2, then I can't help you. I know it's not about law and order and paper work. Most of you fucks cheat on your taxes, so fuck me. It's a terrible pretext in that it's so fucking obvious my dog knows what you're up to.
Said another way, if the goal is to build a greater society here, then why wouldn't we let in people who want to work, and also send 5 SalemKewgs off with every Paco who held up a 7-11? Seriously? Paco just got here and doesn't have this place dialed in. Salem and his retarded friends have zero excuse. It was all set up for them and they were just too fucking stupid to do anything with it.
I want to hear to some tuff Troomp talk on MY plan, which is the single greatest plan. People tell me all the time how great my plan is.
If Sanctuary cites were for the purpose of the local implementation of Jim Crow we would see a quick return to the Federalism this country is known for and fought a bloody civil war over.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
Agreed with all that. Isn't it at least a little interesting, philosophically, that Scalia used the very idea of anti-federalism to substantiate his abortion position in each one of his dissents?
Given the gravity of the issue, does it make sense to leave that up to local or regional flavor? If the argument for pro life is based in the idea of the fundamental right to life and happiness and all that, shouldn't he have pushed it (a ban that is) down the throats of the states in the same name of federalism to which you appeal in this argument?
The world and running it is a complicated business. That's why I always shudder at simple answers. They rarely survive.
I don't see how it WOULD benefit our Country to give folks the boot who have been working, paying taxes and not breaking the law. If they stole someone's job when they got here, it's their's now and many of those employees wouldn't be replaced quickly. Meanwhile farmers, restaurants and hotels and creeps lawn are working shorthanded.
Trump actually has the balls to get something like this done. Give an amnesty plan to not just the DACA's but also the folks who have been here 10 or more years and fit the above stated criteria. But on the back end of this, there would be no more sanctuary cities and local and state law enforcement would need to cooperate and collaborate with ICE, Feds and Border Patrol to make illegals that don't fit the criteria to GTFO. I don't really care about the wall as that's just a rallying point for low info voter.
If he were to step up and do that, it would absolutely neuter the Democratic party for years.
That's a logical plan that would get 80% support.
Which means we can't have it.
Of course it sounds like a logical plan to you. Gives you everything you want: total amnesty, no wall, but with the inconvenience that states and cities agree to comply with federal immigration law they should have been complying with in the first place. It's a shitty plan worthy of Lindsay Graham, that wouldn't wouldn't neuter the democratic party at all. It would neuter Trump's base and ensure he doesn't get re-elected.
Most are too PC to say it, but I'm not. Trump's base is fed up with immigration and wants the immigration rate to be ZERO. Only the best and brightest 5 star recruits should be admitted. There will be a wall to keep out unwanted vermin. Nothing short of the total destruction of the visa lottery program will be acceptable. No more religious fascists from shithole countries. No more chain migration.
In exchange for everything just listed, the dreamers that particular group of illegal aliens can stay.
Comments
California has important work going on helping lead the world, and we choose not to waste our resources on trumpian foolishness.
I'm about to hire a couple employees that are illegal.
I will everify and they will pass.
And I'm okay with it.
Today’s Tug has been great to read. I always expect great insights from @YellowSnow. There’s also been interesting takes from Race and Salem.
Lots of vitriol however here though. I hate that! Thats why I’ve spent most of my time on the football board today. It’s the off-season and the only time I have any opening or opportunity to post there. We’re piling on DDY and his concerns about Garfield and Rainier beach high schools. Good shit.
Cities don't get to make their own laws that conflict with federal law. Any punishment is acceptable including federal troops burning the city down.
I'm currently at a shitty local bar and hanging out with the bartender who finished her shift.
Not very cute but getting cuter.
She thinks I'm an idiot.
The democrats long love affair with States Rights going back to slavery can't be tolerated any longer
Mount Up! To the sea!
You gonna take that shit from a Kewg OBK?
Salembrah, I personally don't see the need for invoking the C word. The guy wants a wall. It's ok to disagree, but Jeebus ... you go too far Kewg. You are my brother from a shared special needs mother, but come on ... I can't defend you when you act like this. It's TOO MUCH!
Shouldn't be a problem for a street brawler like him. And his base will eat it up. obk will brb, yo until the cows come home.
I don't see it happening though. He'll just send out some really mean tweets.
It's kind of the same as you pretending you're not a worthless duck loving fuckstick by hanging out here.
Secondly, the creep's take:
- People that are here doing the right thing should stay.
- For every brown person we deport for not doing the right thing, we deport 5 undesirable honkeys (or blicks or latinos or ___) who have at least one generation of citizenship behind them and who still can't figure it the fuck out despite their ridiculous advantages.
- Tighter border security, particularly for terrorist screening. It's HARD, but that's what matters. Not the beaners. Irrelevant.
- Within the strictures of tighter border security, let people in. It is fundamentally immoral to let in surgeons and not let in people who want to work their asses off and give their children a shot at the surgeon gig. Both are good for us; both are what built America.
I don't give a fuck about the rest. And let me be clear in my position: if you have a problem with my No. 2, then I can't help you. I know it's not about law and order and paper work. Most of you fucks cheat on your taxes, so fuck me. It's a terrible pretext in that it's so fucking obvious my dog knows what you're up to.
Said another way, if the goal is to build a greater society here, then why wouldn't we let in people who want to work, and also send 5 SalemKewgs off with every Paco who held up a 7-11? Seriously? Paco just got here and doesn't have this place dialed in. Salem and his retarded friends have zero excuse. It was all set up for them and they were just too fucking stupid to do anything with it.
I want to hear to some tuff Troomp talk on MY plan, which is the single greatest plan. People tell me all the time how great my plan is.
Given the gravity of the issue, does it make sense to leave that up to local or regional flavor? If the argument for pro life is based in the idea of the fundamental right to life and happiness and all that, shouldn't he have pushed it (a ban that is) down the throats of the states in the same name of federalism to which you appeal in this argument?
The world and running it is a complicated business. That's why I always shudder at simple answers. They rarely survive.
We've covered this.