This pisses off OBK

Just one leg of the stool. You still have culture and cheap labor.

YellowSnow said:

Sample pool, too small, and homicides rates have gone down in most cities since the early 90s.

But still, I am pretty sure the data shows, immigrants aren't any more likely to commit crimes than natives, unless they're super greasy and oily like @creepycoug

But what about sex trafficking and gangs and rapey culture?

I totally respect Steve Bannon (who himself said a lot of the southern border invasion stuff was dramatized) and other serious neo-cons, even though I don't entirely understand their long-game economis platform.

But the culture war pussies like OBK are a hard sell for me. Sorry, but cry me a fucking river. IDGAF.

YellowSnow said:

Sample pool, too small, and homicides rates have gone down in most cities since the early 90s.

But still, I am pretty sure the data shows, immigrants aren't any more likely to commit crimes than natives, unless they're super greasy and oily like @creepycoug

Immigrants I would agree. Illegal immigrants, not so sure.

SFGbob said:

creepycoug said:

YellowSnow said:

Sample pool, too small, and homicides rates have gone down in most cities since the early 90s.

But still, I am pretty sure the data shows, immigrants aren't any more likely to commit crimes than natives, unless they're super greasy and oily like @creepycoug

But what about sex trafficking and gangs and rapey culture?

I totally respect Steve Bannon (who himself said a lot of the southern border invasion stuff was dramatized) and other serious neo-cons, even though I don't entirely understand their long-game economis platform.

But the culture war pussies like OBK are a hard sell for me. Sorry, but cry me a fucking river. IDGAF.

Is his fear of illegals more or less irrational than your fear of the Christian Right?

You'll have to ask him.

I prefer an agnostic and small state and would much rather the mores by which I live my life be a product of my own private associations, including the church (if any) I choose to attend. If that makes me irrational, then color me crazy.

Of course I understand that our collective sense of right and wrong comes from somewhere, whether that be divine, ethereal or flawed social construct, or a subtle mix of the three. When any religious group tries to influence the political process, I take notice. I'm not so much afraid of Christians; I myself was brought up in a fairly intense Catholic tradition. I simply prefer, and have greater respect for, my fellow Americans who maintain their religiosity in a more private manner.

Back to culture. Whatever you take our culture to be and whatever it is some seek to protect against waves of culture changers, it is the product of a lot of past immigration. People come, they acclimate and they leave a little influence. Nothing wrong with that in my book. I would not have been the guy at the dock throwing garbage at Irish immigrants.

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

Sample pool, too small, and homicides rates have gone down in most cities since the early 90s.

But still, I am pretty sure the data shows, immigrants aren't any more likely to commit crimes than natives, unless they're super greasy and oily like @creepycoug

Immigrants I would agree. Illegal immigrants, not so sure.

Just to keep the record straight, I am for legal immigration and against illegal immigration. I think we have bigger problems than illegal immigration, but if there's cash available to make it better then you have my proxy to spend it. I also think the policy of intensive vetting has been a success and I unequivocally support Trump's policies in that regard. I've said so consistently. There is no question that it is the role of the federal government, through the Congress and the Executive Branch, to regulate who comes into the country and on what terms. Anybody who would seriously argue otherwise needs their heads examined.

I also think anybody who comes here should enjoy levels of belonging through phased-in citizenship, primarily as that relates to any kind of public assistance. There should also be a trial period during which the commission of any felony means instant deportation.

creepycoug said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

Sample pool, too small, and homicides rates have gone down in most cities since the early 90s.

But still, I am pretty sure the data shows, immigrants aren't any more likely to commit crimes than natives, unless they're super greasy and oily like @creepycoug

Immigrants I would agree. Illegal immigrants, not so sure.

Just to keep the record straight, I am for legal immigration and against illegal immigration. I think we have bigger problems than illegal immigration, but if there's cash available to make it better then you have my proxy to spend it. I also think the policy of intensive vetting has been a success and I unequivocally support Trump's policies in that regard. I've said so consistently. There is no question that it is the role of the federal government, through the Congress and the Executive Branch, to regulate who comes into the country and on what terms. Anybody who would seriously argue otherwise needs their heads examined.

I also think anybody who comes here should enjoy levels of belonging through phased-in citizenship, primarily as that relates to any kind of public assistance. There should also be a trial period during which the commission of any felony means instant deportation.

Is that just anybody anybody or anybody here legally?

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

creepycoug said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

Sample pool, too small, and homicides rates have gone down in most cities since the early 90s.

But still, I am pretty sure the data shows, immigrants aren't any more likely to commit crimes than natives, unless they're super greasy and oily like @creepycoug

Immigrants I would agree. Illegal immigrants, not so sure.

Just to keep the record straight, I am for legal immigration and against illegal immigration. I think we have bigger problems than illegal immigration, but if there's cash available to make it better then you have my proxy to spend it. I also think the policy of intensive vetting has been a success and I unequivocally support Trump's policies in that regard. I've said so consistently. There is no question that it is the role of the federal government, through the Congress and the Executive Branch, to regulate who comes into the country and on what terms. Anybody who would seriously argue otherwise needs their heads examined.

I also think anybody who comes here should enjoy levels of belonging through phased-in citizenship, primarily as that relates to any kind of public assistance. There should also be a trial period during which the commission of any felony means instant deportation.

Is that just anybody anybody or anybody here legally?

Anybody anybody. If by our good graces you are admitted to the country, you should behave yourself and be productive before gaining full citizenship.

No, my question was - if someone is here illegally - they also get full public assistance?

Or are you saying anybody who comes here via LEGAL means is eligible for public assistance?

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

creepycoug said:

PurpleThrobber said:

creepycoug said:

SFGbob said:

YellowSnow said:

Sample pool, too small, and homicides rates have gone down in most cities since the early 90s.

But still, I am pretty sure the data shows, immigrants aren't any more likely to commit crimes than natives, unless they're super greasy and oily like @creepycoug

Immigrants I would agree. Illegal immigrants, not so sure.

Just to keep the record straight, I am for legal immigration and against illegal immigration. I think we have bigger problems than illegal immigration, but if there's cash available to make it better then you have my proxy to spend it. I also think the policy of intensive vetting has been a success and I unequivocally support Trump's policies in that regard. I've said so consistently. There is no question that it is the role of the federal government, through the Congress and the Executive Branch, to regulate who comes into the country and on what terms. Anybody who would seriously argue otherwise needs their heads examined.

I also think anybody who comes here should enjoy levels of belonging through phased-in citizenship, primarily as that relates to any kind of public assistance. There should also be a trial period during which the commission of any felony means instant deportation.

Is that just anybody anybody or anybody here legally?

Anybody anybody. If by our good graces you are admitted to the country, you should behave yourself and be productive before gaining full citizenship.

No, my question was - if someone is here illegally - they also get full public assistance?

Or are you saying anybody who comes here via LEGAL means is eligible for public assistance?

Illegal - deported so of course nothing. I mean the very first thing you did was break the law. Gotta go.

Legal - trial period no felony or you get deported and no public assistance until you've worked and paid taxes for ten years. 20 if you like that better.

Ok. Just seeking clarity.