|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: CATO Institute had a big IMMIGRATION AND NATIONAL IDENTITY survey, April 27, 2021 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
I cant link, but here is what to Google
H R 6061 (109th): Secure Fence Act of 2006 Put that into ghb Google with House votes or "Senate votes" to see every vote from every member. The House vote had Republicans dupport by a 219 to 6 vote, and Democrats opposed 131 to 64. (Of the then 12 Democratic members from Texas, only Chet Edward's voted for it) The Senate saw 54 Republicans vote for it and only Linvoln Chafee voted Ed agsinst it. 26 Democrats voted for it, and 17 against. Sanders opposed it in th Ed House.Jeffords, another independent, also from Vermont, opposed it in the Senate. Nevertheless, it is considered a very bipartisan bill, due to the 2/3s supermajority that supported it. Liberals overwhelmingly opposed it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
But I was expressing my support for BOTH government assistance availability AND higher immigration levels.
All in post 6. Percy never quoted my post 6. I challenge him to quote my post 6. (AzPaul called me a racist while responding to my post 12)(AzPaul called me a racist but refuses to quote my entire post 12) El Paso United States Congresswoman Veronica Escobar (successor to Beto) said the El Paso border wall is a monument to division and racism. I will give you all the words of Percy telling us El Paso "needs" the border wall. PaulK wont quote Percy, so I will Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
There was 617 miles of the wall.
300 miles were simply vehicle barriers, which stopped no pedestrian. 317 miles were true pedestrian barriers. I am still researching, but the El Paso wall was only around half finished, it seems. It is hard to get the information from what is poll n the web.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
Robert Farley, of fact check, Jan 18. 2019 is my source
He said the wall was not built in 1993 It was started in 2008 It came from the Secure Fence Act of 2006
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
Bush was trying to get comprehensive immigration reform, which was a way to offer a pathway to citizenship for illegals, in 2006 ( politically speaking, the public would never have allowed a line-item stand alone amnesty bill, but as part of a "comphrensive" package, it was possible).
It backfired. The country got the unpopular wall/fence shoved down its throat, but not much else. As an American, I remember when the only fence/wall was the one in San Diego (not saying that I was totally correct. But I remember thinking, in 1997, that the only wall-type structure was the fence in San Diego)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
I only read up to your repeated lie that I was somehow giving the Democrats credit ffg or supporting open borders. Then I stopped reading
I never thought Democrats made any implications for open borders while attacking the wall policy of Trump. I never thought most people, including Democrats, felt that a wall being absent equates to open borders. What was I saying? I was saying it was hypocritical to attack the wall while still deporting immigrants. What truth is there to your claim that I was genuinely seeing any day of sunshine in the historically anti-immigration Democratic party? Any truth to your lies? The only (very very slight) truth is that I was wondering just how sincere the opposition to deportation of children was. Hillary Clinton was probably just making a one time campaign lie, to Jorge Ramos, in 2016. Sanders might have been telling the truth when he promised to never deport children, but raw political pressure, from the majority of Americans, would surely make the battle (if Democrats embarked on a real fight for real rights) very very difficult. (Percy said Hillary never intended to say children would have the right to remain here forever) (Percy already was watering the day of sunshine down) Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
PaulK is selectively quoting Percy's selective (not as bad as PaulK's selectivity, however) quotes, from my posts 2768 to 2772, in the old thread.
PaulK keeps quoting Percy's post 2774. I was so clearly saying Democrats were not going to support immigrant children's right to remain in the United States, that this is really only a discussion literally ONLY ABOUT HOW IDIOTIC PAULK TRUELY IS. See posts 2768 to 2772. God this is obvious. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
If you actually read my post 2770, then you are telling a blatant lie about my supposed views.
I was saying Democrats were going to offer amnesty to illegal immigrants? I was saying Democrats were supporting open borders? You are a liar. Posts 2768 to 2772 were very clear, and you are very much a disruptor.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
Read post 2768 to 2772
I was attacking Democrats and saying they would not oppose deportation of child migrants. You want to defend your post 31, in this thread, which claimed I was saying Democrats were a party supportive of amnesty. You are a dishonest troll. If this site had any real moderation, then you would and should be banned. Lies serve no purpose but to ruin a discussion (the site is packed with dishonest people, so you will surely get away with totally disruptive behavior) Read post 2768 to 2772. (Only an obvious troll could say that I was calling Democrats a party supportive of amnesty and open borders) Read posts 2768 to 2772 Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
PaulK is a disgraceful troll.
He told provable lies in his post 32. And keeps repeating the same lies. (He said I called the Democratic party a party of amnesty and open borders) (He is still saying such) Do something that stops obvious lies. This is easy. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
And you wonder why this site is down to 9 regular posters (to inflate the numbers of remnants with the strong stomachs).
Truely disgusting conduct. When Percy quoted my post 6, his only quote was my FACTUAL report that immigration levels were capable of getting broad public support for a yearly increase with a requirement that immigrants prove they wont use welfare. (The old public charge issue) I then went on to express support for immigration increases and no public charge requirements (moratorium on whatever benefits are presently available ). Percy called me a racist based on my factual analysis of public opinion. I responded, saying that I was not against benefit moratoriums. You responded to my factual post 12, calling me racist. The only line in post 12 that was am opinion was my support for public welfare benefits for immigrants. You are a repulsive disgrace. You are a very reason why this site is practically dead. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
That will have to come in my next post, or later in this post.
FIRST I have to respond to yet another lie of Percy: He claimed that I said "I am not a racist". It is a false quote. I never ever said that anywhere, and I mean anywhere in space/time, in the entire Universe. I did correctly point out the fact that I was called a racist, in several posts, but that was an attempt to get the persons who made the weak comments to address the actual post, that the comment was a "reply" to. NOW MY COMMENT ABOUT EQUATING IMMIGRATION POLICY WITH RACE POLICY: It is true that racists are clearly a large "swing vote" that can make the difference between success and failure of a given policy. But just because racists side with a particular referendum issue, political candidate, or policy proposal DOES NOT mean that everybody who supports the same policy, candidate, or issue is also a racist. This CATO poll asked people whether opposition to immigration is primarily due to racism or other sincere policy concerns. So, the BIG PICTURE view can clearly allow one to say that the 53% of Americans, who support cutting benefits to immigrants, are only in the majority due to the general support, for this policy position, provided by racists. What cannot be said is that INDIVIDUALS who respectively support barring/cutting benefits to immigrants are racists. (The opposition to benefits for immigrants was 53%, but that is not tug o be confused with the much more hypothetical "tradeoff" policy which eliminates benefits for immigrants with a parallel policy of increasing immigration levels above 1 million per year) This discussion might not be possible here. There are too many people who post here who use evasion techniques. Hit and evade. Hit with a false strawman accusstion, then evade the request to back up the hit. A person trying to engage that type of behavior is getting into a situation much like stepping quick sand. The ground is "bad", you will be really limited in what you can do on/in it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
Need Verb A1 To have to have something, or to want something very much I am about to quote Percy's exchange with me, during our "debate" , years ago. Just because I quote his words does not mean I accept his strawman arguments, mind you. He accused me of getting "Republican talking points" while I was actually reading an ACLU article, which was saying Democrats are playing semantic games on the issue of a wall verses fence. I will quote the entire paragraph, so I am not accused of something I will nevertheless get accused of anyway. (Percy likes to say I am confused when I don't accept his non sequitur arguments) (I prefer to get back to the facts) Hey Percy. Spare me your semantics, context twisting, and various evasion techniques. That is a watered down list of Percy's tactics. Quotes coming soon... ...to the Percy near you... Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined:
|
You never asked me about the details of an immigration increase. The tax idea was my idea, but it had to do with a hyporhetical big immigration increase. It was am idea that was based on taxes on future immigrants, and I would prefer at least 2 million more immigrants per year. A tripling of levels.
First generation Americans already pay $63 billion more per year than they get from the government. The CATO Institute brought us this previous study. I shared it here. Years ago. I would urge you to understand that Democrats acrually do not support increasing the yearly immigration levels, in this poll. Or any other. They seem to max out at 47%. Americans finally broke 30% support for yearly increases, in the Gallup poll, around 3 years ago. Democrats were at 47% then. Then national support fell to 27% for an increase, in the poll a few years ago. New ground was broken in the last 2 Gallup polls. 34% supported an increase, them 33% in the last one. This Cato poll has the nation at 29% and Democrats at 47%. So the political winds are not blowing in favor of a yearly increase. There needs to be a big idea to get a humane number of immigrants the chance to immigrate. Do you know it is almost impossible for a poor person to immigrate here? Do you know how few refugees get to immigrate here? You have the chance to immigrate here in 20 years, if you have a relative that became a citizen. A highly skilled worker stands a somewhat less than awful chance to immigrate at some point. Do you know how few people are admitted per year via the lottery? It is about 50 000 per year. Refugees need to increase from 50,000 per year to (at least) 1 million. Family members should increase from 500,000 a year to at least 1 million. The lottery needs to be raised to (at least) 1 million, from 50,000. If I would keep anything the same, it would be worker VISA levels. But Democrats refuse to budge on allowing the total numbers above 1 million, combined, pet year. ( I caught Biden once, in the primary, say we can take in 2 million more, but that wont go anywhere) Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
Many immigration reformers, that advocate for big increases per year, tend to favor ending family & worker immigration, and having all immigrants admitted, aside from refugees, be through a lottery.
The number often tends to be 3 million. The lottery is my favorite immigration category. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024