America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 7 years ago by Covfireman. 66 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Hey DEMS, WTF???
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Abrignac Offline
#1 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 7:11 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
President William Jefferson Clinton's State of the Union address to Congress on January 24, 1995 wrote:
All Americans, not only in the states most heavily affected but in every place in this country, are rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country. The jobs they hold might otherwise be held by citizens or legal immigrants. The public service they use impose burdens on our taxpayers. That's why our administration has moved aggressively to secure our borders more by hiring a record number of new border guards, by deporting twice as many criminal aliens as ever before, by cracking down on illegal hiring, by barring welfare benefits to illegal aliens. In the budget I will present to you, we will try to do more to speed the deportation of illegal aliens who are arrested for crimes, to better identify illegal aliens in the workplace as recommended by the commission headed by former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan. We are a nation of immigrants. But we are also a nation of laws. It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years, and we must do more to stop it.


Check it out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3yesvvYEvs

History has a funny way of reminding people of the past.
tonygraz Offline
#2 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 7:17 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,247
Remember what Pence said about banning immigrants in 2015.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#3 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 7:22 PM EST
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
Did he tell them to eat sh*t and die?
Abrignac Offline
#4 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 7:23 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
Tony, I'm assuming this is what you are referring to???

Calls to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. are offensive and unconstitutional.

— Governor Mike Pence (@GovPenceIN) December 8, 2015
teedubbya Offline
#5 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 7:28 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I think the vast vast majority of folks are anti illegal immigration. But there are degrees of rabidity and scapegoating that differ. It's not black and white.
Abrignac Offline
#6 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 7:59 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
Perhaps, we need a lesson on this so called Muslim ban.

Here is a link to that Executive Order being called a Muslim ban:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states

I did a word search "Muslim." To my complete and utter surprise that word is found absolutely no where in that Executive Order.

Interesting though this is found within said Executive Order:

(c) To temporarily reduce investigative burdens on relevant agencies during the review period described in subsection (a) of this section, to ensure the proper review and maximum utilization of available resources for the screening of foreign nationals, and to ensure that adequate standards are established to prevent infiltration by foreign terrorists or criminals, pursuant to section 212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f), I hereby proclaim that the immigrant and nonimmigrant entry into the United States of aliens from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12), would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and I hereby suspend entry into the United States, as immigrants and nonimmigrants, of such persons for 90 days from the date of this order (excluding those foreign nationals traveling on diplomatic visas, North Atlantic Treaty Organization visas, C-2 visas for travel to the United Nations, and G-1, G-2, G-3, and G-4 visas).

217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12) wrote:
(12) Not present in Iraq, Syria, or any other country or area of concern
(A) In generalExcept as provided in subparagraphs (B) and (C)—
(i) the alien has not been present, at any time on or after March 1, 2011—
(I) in Iraq or Syria;
(II) in a country that is designated by the Secretary of State under section 4605(j) of title 50 (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)), section 2780 of title 22, section 2371 of title 22, or any other provision of law, as a country, the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or
(III) in any other country or area of concern designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D); and
(ii) regardless of whether the alien is a national of a program country, the alien is not a national of—
(I) Iraq or Syria;
(II) a country that is designated, at the time the alien applies for admission, by the Secretary of State under section 4605(j) of title 50 (as continued in effect under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)), section 2780 of title 22, section 2371 of title 22, or any other provision of law, as a country, the government of which has repeatedly provided support of acts of international terrorism; or
(III) any other country that is designated, at the time the alien applies for admission, by the Secretary of Homeland Security under subparagraph (D).



DHS Announces Further Travel Restrictions for the Visa Waiver Program (paragraph 1)
Release Date:
February 18, 2016 wrote:
WASHINGTON—The Department of Homeland Security today announced that it is continuing its implementation of the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015 with the addition of Libya, Somalia, and Yemen as three countries of concern, limiting Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals who have traveled to these countries.


DHS Announces Further Travel Restrictions for the Visa Waiver Program (paragraph 3)
Release Date:
February 18, 2016(paragraph 2) wrote:
Last month, the United States began implementing changes under the Act. The three additional countries designated today join Iran, Iraq, Sudan and Syria as countries subject to restrictions for Visa Waiver Program travel for certain individuals. Under the new law, the Secretary of Homeland Security may waive these restrictions if he determines that such a waiver is in the law enforcement or national security interests of the United States. Such waivers will be granted only on a case-by-case basis. As a general matter, categories of travelers who may be eligible for a waiver include individuals who traveled to these countries on behalf of international organizations, regional organizations, and sub-national governments on official duty; on behalf of a humanitarian NGO on official duty; or as a journalist for reporting purposes.


Where was the outrage when Obama instituted a Muslim ban on February 18, 2016???
Burner02 Offline
#7 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 8:06 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
Don't know that they can get their arms around this much info.
fiddler898 Offline
#8 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 8:10 PM EST
Joined: 06-15-2009
Posts: 3,782
Why bother perpetuating a false equivalency? And don't ask me about it - do your own homework and report to class tomorrow morning.
victor809 Offline
#9 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 8:11 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
... because removing a visa waiver is not banning someone?

They just need a visa. I mean... I've had to get visas to go to some countries before... all the restrictions of the visa waiver program did is required some individuals who were travelling without a visa to get one.
Abrignac Offline
#10 Posted: Mon, Jan 30 2017, 8:38 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
fiddler898 wrote:
Why bother perpetuating a false equivalency? And don't ask me about it - do your own homework and report to class tomorrow morning.


My paper has been turned in. Feel free to mark what is incorrect. But, please don't forget to include remarks so I can make corrections.
tonygraz Offline
#11 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 9:20 AM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,247
I don't know why you are surprised that the word Muslim is not in the Executive Order. All the rhetoric prior to the order was heavy with religious commentary and apparently someone scrubbed any mention of religion from the Executive Order to keep it from being obviously unconstitutional.
tailgater Offline
#12 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 9:44 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
tonygraz wrote:
I don't know why you are surprised that the word Muslim is not in the Executive Order. All the rhetoric prior to the order was heavy with religious commentary and apparently someone scrubbed any mention of religion from the Executive Order to keep it from being obviously unconstitutional.


LOL!

You're right about the rhetoric, but when the pedal hit the metal the ban wasn't based on religion, but rather on the countries already identified as a threat.
Only a simpleton would still call it a ban on Muslims.
No offense intended...
DrMaddVibe Offline
#13 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 9:51 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,424
Why it's nothing like when the Kenyan King banned Cuban refugees.
tailgater Offline
#14 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 9:52 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Best part is that this is temporary.
120 days.
To better define the process and reassess the situation.
(but the left whine).

Further to the point, when Obama did the same thing to Iraq back in 2011 for a full 6 months (that's twice as long as the 120 days, for the apparently mathematically challenged left) there were "thousands" that had to abort previously planned flights. and people were literally "taken off planes" because of the Obama ban.
(but the left were silent).

So stop with the outcry about human rights.
This is 100% pure partisan politics.
And to cloak it in something more meaningful is disingenuous at best.

Buncha whiny snowflakes.
You lost.
Get over it.
Herfing
tailgater Offline
#15 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:00 AM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Side note:
I'm looking for pointers on how else I can antagonize the mewling masses who hate trump with a new found passion.
MACS Offline
#16 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:11 AM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,774
tailgater wrote:
Side note:
I'm looking for pointers on how else I can antagonize the mewling masses who hate trump with a new found passion.


Before you do... brush up on yo math skillz, sucka. 6 months = 180 days, 120 days is 2/3 of 180, not half.
victor809 Offline
#17 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:12 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Tail... your obama 2011 comparison is faulty according to factcheck.

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/trumps-faulty-refugee-policy-comparison/
DrafterX Offline
#18 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:12 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
Trump made Schumer cry.. Sad
Mr. Jones Offline
#19 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:20 AM EST
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,421
Send
"them( all the JIHADIST RADICAL TERRORISTS plus their 4 WIVES and 22 SPAWN EACH....AND BELIEVE ME!!! The FBI, JSOC, HOMELAND SECURITY A.L.L. KNOW EXACTLY WHO THEY ARE BECAUSE THEY FOLLOW THEM AROUND ALL THE TIME AND TAP THEIR PHONES, READ THEIR MAIL, TRACK THEIR PURCHASES, MONITOR THEIR BANK ACCTS, KNOW WHAT MOSQUES THEY ATTEND..THEY KNOW EVERY *****ING THING ABOUT THEM...BAR NONE...THEY JUST SAY "THEY don't" for plausible deniability) ...
BACK ON CRUISE SHIPS"

WITH :

NO SHOWS
NO BUFFET
NO ALCOHOL
EMPTY POOLS
RICE, WAFFLES AND WATER

And WWII LANDING CRAFT DISEMBARK DEM'
BACK TO THE SANDBOX WASTELAND HENCE THEY CAME....
delta1 Offline
#20 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 2:27 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
[quote=Abrignac]Perhaps, we need a lesson on this so called Muslim ban.

Here is a link to that Executive Order being called a Muslim ban:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/27/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states

I did a word search "Muslim." To my complete and utter surprise that word is found absolutely no where in that Executive Order.

quote]

Illegal discrimination can take two forms: de jure, by law; and de facto, in practice.

The Supreme Court has found unconstitutional discrimination using both tests. So although nowhere in Trump's order does it say that Muslims will be banned, in practice, as implemented, the only people detained were Muslims.
DrafterX Offline
#21 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 2:31 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
So that's kinda like saying all people from San Francisco are banned and only gay-homos were being detained.. Mellow
DrMaddVibe Offline
#22 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 2:56 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,424
Maybe it was ungay homos?

What about bisexual clowns?

What about transsexual boy scouts?

d'oh!
delta1 Offline
#23 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 3:06 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
yep, if they were detained...

Trump didn't make it easy for the AG/DOJ to defend this in the courts. He has consistently said he was going to ban all Muslims and do extreme vetting. It's already being litigated in many states, and more than likely will make its way to the US Supreme Court. He better hurry up and get somebody who thinks like him nominated...shoulda done that first...
delta1 Offline
#24 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 3:08 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
MACS wrote:
Before you do... brush up on yo math skillz, sucka. 6 months = 180 days, 120 days is 2/3 of 180, not half.


chuckle...1/2...
gummy jones Offline
#25 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 3:11 PM EST
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
uncontrolled and unvetted immigration is bad for almost everyone
opelmanta1900 Offline
#26 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 3:18 PM EST
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
I think the courts will likely recognize the difference between

A) temporarily halting immigration from some - not all - predominately Muslim countries where entirely Muslim terrorist activities are known to be planned and trained for

And

B) placing a "ban on all muslims"
delta1 Offline
#27 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 4:17 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
or

C) go fishing!!!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#28 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 4:19 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,424
delta1 wrote:
yep, if they were detained...

Trump didn't make it easy for the AG/DOJ to defend this in the courts. He has consistently said he was going to ban all Muslims and do extreme vetting. It's already being litigated in many states, and more than likely will make its way to the US Supreme Court. He better hurry up and get somebody who thinks like him nominated...shoulda done that first...



Nothing like stretching the truth...why that's really called lying!

Why not go all in and call him a homophobe and a misogynist while you're at it!
opelmanta1900 Offline
#29 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 5:44 PM EST
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
delta1 wrote:
or

C) go fishing!!!

If they don't pick c, they're idiots!
tailgater Offline
#30 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 9:04 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
MACS wrote:
Before you do... brush up on yo math skillz, sucka. 6 months = 180 days, 120 days is 2/3 of 180, not half.


Do I win an irony award?
tailgater Offline
#31 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 9:17 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Tail... your obama 2011 comparison is faulty according to factcheck.

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/01/trumps-faulty-refugee-policy-comparison/


What part is faulty?
Be specific.

Obama put a ban on Iraqi's traveling into the US.
People were inconvenienced.
The world continued to spin.
The left didn't riot.

Where was I misled?
victor809 Offline
#32 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 9:24 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
I'm not reading that damn article again.
tailgater Offline
#33 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 9:46 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
So you see where I'm coming from?
Abrignac Offline
#34 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:11 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
victor809 wrote:
I'm not reading that damn article again.


A while back, Obama's admin invoked travel restrictions using the EXACT same seven nations as identifiers. The left didn't make a peep. Trump does it and it's like Godzilla took a huge crap everywhere. Somehow factcheck misses the point.

That pretty much sums it up.
victor809 Offline
#35 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:16 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Nah. Same nations. Much less restricted. Something about just not allowing automatic visa issuance. Not gonna look right now, at the gym.
victor809 Offline
#36 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:17 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
To be fair.. he also didn't have Giuliani making pronouncements that he helped design it to make a technically legal way to specially ban muslims....
Abrignac Offline
#37 Posted: Tue, Jan 31 2017, 10:30 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
victor809 wrote:
To be fair.. he also didn't have Giuliani making pronouncements that he helped design it to make a technically legal way to specially ban muslims....



Yep, talk about sour grapes.
DrafterX Offline
#38 Posted: Wed, Feb 1 2017, 7:59 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
“President Obama is heartened by the level of engagement taking place in communities around the country,” Kevin Lewis, a spokesman for the former president, said in a statement. “Citizens exercising their constitutional right to assemble, organize and have their voices heard by their elected officials is exactly what we expect to see when American values are at stake.”

Obama and his team are not ruling out a forceful challenge to Trump in the coming months, Politico, citing people in contact with the former president, reported.

There is debate on how to approach a Trump attack. There is fear that if Obama comes out too early against Trump it could lessen the effectiveness of the message. His team reportedly does not want Obama to be the face of the anti-Trump protests.

“I wouldn’t be opposed if he spoke out,” Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Calif., told Politico. “I just don’t know what effect it would be.”

He continued, “In hindsight, I believe it was wrong for Barack Obama to normalize Donald Trump,” he said.

Sources told the magazine that Obama is likely saving a more assertive challenge because “knows he only gets one change at it being the first time that he takes on Trump himself.”

Polls show Obama left the office both popular and trusted.He had appeared more cautious about diluting his influence by quickly second-guessing Trump. Doing so could make it easier for Trump to dismiss critiques as predictable partisan nitpicking. And becoming the face of Trump's opposition could make it harder for the next generation of Democratic leaders to emerge.

Obama said nothing Monday when Trump fired his former appointee Sally Yates, who was serving as acting attorney general. He also won't opine on Trump's announcement of a Supreme Court nominee, former White House aides in touch with Obama said.

When Trump's White House claimed Obama, too, temporarily banned Iraqi refugees, the ex-president's deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes shot back: "This is a lie."


Film at 11.... Think
DrMaddVibe Offline
#39 Posted: Wed, Feb 1 2017, 8:16 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,424
Trump’s executive order stops all Iraqi citizens from temporarily entering the U.S. “on any visa category,” affecting those trying to visit family or come here for work, in addition to live. It also affects six other countries. It originally included permanent legal residents of the U.S. with green cards, but on Sunday, the Department of Homeland Security said green card holders would be allowed into the country.

While Obama did halt the refugee program, it did not impact green card holders, or anyone with a visa. It also did not affect refugees who had already gone through the vetting process. Trump’s travel ban barred entry to the United States to those groups, causing a chaotic situation for travelers from the seven affected countries and leading to protests at airports across the country.

“Obama’s policy did not prevent all citizens of that country, including green-card holders, from traveling the United States. Trump’s policy is much more sweeping, though officials have appeared to pull back from barring permanent U.S. residents,” the Washington Post reports.


Trump’s order gives preference to religious minority groups, such as Christians, when the admissions resume, according to The New York Times.

Obama didn’t give any preference to religious minority groups, and his action was limited to refugee resettlement (certainly, it didn’t affect green card holders, for example). However, Obama’s pause in Iraqi refugee admittance had consequences for some people and was driven by a terrorism case involving refugees, ABC News reported. The network reported that, as a result of the pause, an “Iraqi who had aided American troops was assassinated before his refugee application could be processed, because of the immigration delays.” (One of the first men detained under Trump’s executive order, Hameed Darweesh, was an Iraqi interpreter for the U.S. military. He has now been released under an exemption in the order.)

Trump raised the Obama situation in a January 29 statement defending his immigration executive order. He wrote, “My policy is similar to what President Obama did in 2011 when he banned visas for refugees from Iraq for six months. The seven countries named in the executive order are the same countries previously identified by the Obama administration as sources of terror.”

http://heavy.com/news/2017/01/barack-obama-ban-refugees-did-iraq-iraqi-muslim-trump-jimmy-carter-iran-iranian-immigration/
delta1 Offline
#40 Posted: Wed, Feb 1 2017, 12:15 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
You have to admire Trump's audacity. He blind-sided everybody with the sudden implementation of this policy, much like a law enforcement operation. You don't want to let the perps know on Friday that you are coming on Sunday to arrest them. He has been saying from the beginning of his campaign for the presidency that we don't know who's coming in and haven't done a careful job of vetting Muslims. He was frightening people by suggesting that they could be coming in everyday and we weren't catching them. Thus, "Ban Muslims and Extreme Vetting."

If at least one detained person was of questionable background, with ties to terrorists and terrorist organizations, Trump would've basked in his greatest moment of his nascent Presidency. He's definitely taking risks.

The courts may decide whether of not he's right.
Abrignac Offline
#41 Posted: Wed, Feb 1 2017, 12:51 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
This a very interesting argument. But, what we are seeing is the pendulum swinging. When Obama left office, the borders where wide open. Trump is simply closing those doors. There will be a normalization in the near future. This is nothing more than putting on the brakes when approaching a car crash so one can safely navigate around it without making a small wreck bigger. So what if a few hundred or even a few thousand are inconvenienced to protect a few hundred million. The whole argument against Trump is political postering. I pray that we can somehow work together to move the nation forward. We have had decades of oneupmanship. IDGAF who started it since it is impossible to keep score or even determine who threw the first punch. It's time to quit acting like a bunch of spoiled babies and act like adults.
DrafterX Offline
#42 Posted: Wed, Feb 1 2017, 12:59 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
We wouldn't be in this mess if Bloody hadn't screwed those chikens... Mad
frankj1 Offline
#43 Posted: Wed, Feb 1 2017, 6:35 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
DrafterX wrote:
We wouldn't be in this mess if Bloody hadn't screwed those chikens... Mad

he beat ya to it, eh?
Covfireman Offline
#44 Posted: Sun, Feb 5 2017, 1:41 AM EST
Joined: 09-03-2015
Posts: 809
Why was Saudi Arabia and E.A.U. left off?
tonygraz Offline
#45 Posted: Sun, Feb 5 2017, 8:49 AM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,247
Because Obama left them off his list - or maybe because there are some business interests there that might be affected.
Abrignac Offline
#46 Posted: Sun, Feb 5 2017, 9:26 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,273
Covfireman wrote:
Why was Saudi Arabia and E.A.U. left off?



Who is EAU?
Speyside Offline
#47 Posted: Sun, Feb 5 2017, 9:50 AM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Someone who smells good while drinking brandy?
tonygraz Offline
#48 Posted: Sun, Feb 5 2017, 5:20 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,247
Abrignac wrote:
Who is EAU?


Must be an old French colony or UAE.
elRopo Offline
#49 Posted: Sun, Feb 5 2017, 5:37 PM EST
Joined: 02-17-2014
Posts: 905
We're not talking about U.S. citizens being banned, when did immigration become a constitutional right?
Speyside Offline
#50 Posted: Sun, Feb 5 2017, 5:43 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Tony, Anthony forgot this.Sarcasm
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Back to Top