Their parents brought them and they grew up to be hard-working decent AMERICANS! Now that moronic jackass in the White House wants to DEPORT THEM!!!!!!!!!!

He has his flunkie Sessions justify it by a song-and-dance about THE LAW. You remember Beauregard Sessions - he's the one who LIED about his Russian contacts during his confirmation. He also said he "liked the Ku Klux Klan" - which he later retracted.

So evil Trump justifies his deportation of good people by citing the LAW and how important the LAW is for every country and for civilization itself. THE LAW!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this the same LAW that Trump DEFIED by granting a pardon to the racist Sheriff Arpaio?

He cites the LAW when it suits him. When the LAW doesn't suit him, he simply ignores it.

This double-faced bozo continues his disgraceful march trampling over any decency he encounters.

So much for having a heart and great love for THESE people. He said he would end DACA, and this way he can claim he kept his promise for his loony right wing base. They love the red meat. You think the congress will rise to the challenge and do the will of the American people? I won't hold my breath, but they have 6 months.

Trump asking Congress to do something, the mind boggles, but then mid terms aren't that far away and this is a way of all those pollies getting some runs on the board, to use an aussie cliché. The republicans can prove themselves to the hispanics by giving these people citizenship

They would be happy to just keep living their lives and not get deported to someplace most don't even remember. They deserve citizenship though, much sooner rather than later. A very cruel way to screw people over. I have to note the glee that Sessions delivered his BS reasons for Trumps actions.

Nothing uglier than a true racist except TWO of them.

Too damn bad. They are STILL illegals. I suggest we send them all to Canada... you want them, you can have them.

If their parents stole a car... the kids don't get to keep it to joyride around in.

Contrary to what the tards think....Arpio was ENCFORCING actual Law...Illegals don't get to IGNORE the law just because some other tards want to let them in while OTHER people, MILLIONS of them, follow the law, apply and wait their turn in line, sometimes decades.

You don't reward criminals...and punish those who follow the law.

Deport all this Dreamer dimwits to Canada. If Canadians like them so much, you can have every last one of them.But

But then some moronic jackasses feel certain people are above the law (Left wing loons usually)..and others aren't.....(anyone who is NOT a left wing loon).

Most of them seem to think they are sooooooooooooooooooooo well educated, can't grasp the most simple facts of law and national sovereignty.

NONE of these criminals...and every one IS a criminal....breaking our Immigration laws, DESERVE anything, and certainly NOT citizenship as a reward for their flagrant violation of our laws.

Too damn bad. They are STILL illegals. I suggest we send them all to Canada... you want them, you can have them.

They are illegals because the RACIST who ran government designated them to be. This is nothing but the veiled hardly sanitized version of the Jim Crowe era that was designed specifically to target non-white people and keep whitey pure and in power.

If their parents stole a car... the kids don't get to keep it to joyride around in.

One could say YOU are joyriding in the car YOUR parents stole from the NATIVES. So what if the first thing they did was say they were no longer IMMIGRANTS.

Contrary to what the tards think... Arpio was ENCFORCING actual Law... Illegals don't get to IGNORE the law just because some other tards want to let them in while OTHER people, MILLIONS of them, follow the law, apply and wait their turn in line, sometimes decades.

Oh, what a hypocrite! You trot out the law to use against others, but when one of your own was hauled on the carpet for using illegal tactics, causing death, and violating civil right of lawful citizens, gets convicted in YOUR courts, you pardon him and pat him on the back and say good job, good man! Just another example of coddling RACISTS!

You don't reward criminals... and punish those who follow the law.

More hypocrisy since you obviously have taken a convicted criminal and raised him to sainthood in the APAIO case. What's next a statue?

Deport all this Dreamer dimwits to Canada. If Canadians like them so much, you can have every last one of them.

But then some moronic jackasses feel certain people are above the law (Left wing loons usually).. and others aren't... (anyone who is NOT a left wing loon).

So why is a convicted criminal your hero? That only makes YOU the MoJack of which you speak.

Most of them seem to think they are sooooooooooooooooooooo well educated, can't grasp the most simple facts of law and national sovereignty.

Yeah you fit that description to a "T". The simple facts of law is what a RACIST would use to claim his rights TRUMPS everybody else's! That's why you make laws to justify your own RACISM!

NONE of these criminals... and every one IS a criminal... breaking our Immigration laws, DESERVE anything, and certainly NOT citizenship as a reward for their flagrant violation of our laws.

Considering you Euro-immigrants make laws to keep NON-Euro's criminals that can never be equal to you, for the purpose preserving your own sense of superiority, and the right to tell others not like you what to do and how to do it, you have little room to call anyone a criminal, since your own actions are as criminal as any a non-Euro can commit.

By your logic, if APAIO is above the law, why are DREAMERS not also afforded the same protection of a PARDON? Never mind, your racist brain cannot wrap itself on the simple concepts of the LAW, like "all men are created equal", or "equal protection under the law".

Instead you use the LAW to beat people into submission, who actually have broken no law. At least none that you, or your daddy's daddy have not broken.

I take heart though, that not all Euro-immigrants share your narrow RACIST right wing views, and are better potty trained in the morality of the rule of LAW.

PS

Most of the US was SOVEREIGN Mexico. That makes many Latinos and even South Americans natives to the land.

Most of the US was SOVEREIGN Mexico. That makes many Latinos and even South Americans natives to the land.

Tal, you are a true reversionist, they didn't cross the border because they thought it is their land, they did it for economic reasons.

Smoothy is wrong you can't dump your problem on someone else, it is your problem, they have been allowed to stay there, and through a cruel political deception, they revealed themselves and made themselves more vulnerable.

As children they are not criminals, it is a stupid idea to say they are criminals

Hello:

The 5th Amendment says that you cannot be compelled to be a witness against yourself. The government PROMISED that, in exchange for coming forward, they WOULDN'T be deported, so they did. Certainly, they wouldn't have done that WITHOUT that promise..

So, can the government then change its mind and say to the Dreamers, too bad - so sad - GOTCHA?? I say NOOO.. In my view, the governments' promise is tantamount to immunity...

What sayeth you?

excon

Tal, you are a true reversionist, they didn't cross the border because they thought it is their land, they did it for economic reasons.

My point which seems to have escaped you is a matter of historical fact. I never said that central and southern Hispanics thought they were entitled to the land because it was theirs, YOU did, but fact is they have always migrated back and forth, yes for economic reasons, but mostly because they LIVED here. Had for many centuries before the Euro's cleared them off. Maybe your own Euro education is not as gospel as you think. I found mine was not either.

Smoothy is wrong you can't dump your problem on someone else, it is your problem, they have been allowed to stay there, and through a cruel political deception, they revealed themselves and made themselves more vulnerable.

Racism is alive and well in the US, in fact it never died, and racists will perpetrate the hate by any means necessary. Fortunately they are a TRUE minority, though they are VERY loud about their hate. (RE: FEAR of others, of change, of retribution, of powerlessness, of extinction)

As children they are not criminals, it is a stupid idea to say they are criminals

So why does he (THEY) say it? Come on, I know you know.


The 5th Amendment says that you cannot be compelled to be a witness against yourself. The government PROMISED that, in exchange for coming forward, they WOULDN'T be deported, so they did. Certainly, they wouldn't have done that WITHOUT that promise..

So, can the government then change its mind and say to the Dreamers, too bad - so sad - GOTCHA?? I say NOOO.. In my view, the governments' promise is tantamount to immunity...

What sayeth you?

I sayeth the right wing loonies don't care about the law, only what they can make it do. That's never good for anyone else. Matter of fact in there right wing loony hands it's a lethal weapon.

Too damn bad. They are STILL illegals. I suggest we send them all to Canada... you want them, you can have them.

They are illegals because the RACIST who ran government designated them to be. This is nothing but the veiled hardly sanitized version of the Jim Crowe era that was designed specifically to target non-white people and keep whitey pure and in power.

If their parents stole a car... the kids don't get to keep it to joyride around in.

One could say YOU are joyriding in the car YOUR parents stole from the NATIVES. So what if the first thing they did was say they were no longer IMMIGRANTS.

Contrary to what the tards think... Arpio was ENCFORCING actual Law... Illegals don't get to IGNORE the law just because some other tards want to let them in while OTHER people, MILLIONS of them, follow the law, apply and wait their turn in line, sometimes decades.

Oh, what a hypocrite! You trot out the law to use against others, but when one of your own was hauled on the carpet for using illegal tactics, causing death, and violating civil right of lawful citizens, gets convicted in YOUR courts, you pardon him and pat him on the back and say good job, good man! Just another example of coddling RACISTS!

You don't reward criminals... and punish those who follow the law.

More hypocrisy since you obviously have taken a convicted criminal and raised him to sainthood in the APAIO case. What's next a statue?

Deport all this Dreamer dimwits to Canada. If Canadians like them so much, you can have every last one of them.

But then some moronic jackasses feel certain people are above the law (Left wing loons usually).. and others aren't... (anyone who is NOT a left wing loon).

So why is a convicted criminal your hero? That only makes YOU the MoJack of which you speak.

Most of them seem to think they are sooooooooooooooooooooo well educated, can't grasp the most simple facts of law and national sovereignty.

Yeah you fit that description to a "T". The simple facts of law is what a RACIST would use to claim his rights TRUMPS everybody else's! That's why you make laws to justify your own RACISM!

NONE of these criminals... and every one IS a criminal... breaking our Immigration laws, DESERVE anything, and certainly NOT citizenship as a reward for their flagrant violation of our laws.

Considering you Euro-immigrants make laws to keep NON-Euro's criminals that can never be equal to you, for the purpose preserving your own sense of superiority, and the right to tell others not like you what to do and how to do it, you have little room to call anyone a criminal, since your own actions are as criminal as any a non-Euro can commit.

By your logic, if APAIO is above the law, why are DREAMERS not also afforded the same protection of a PARDON? Never mind, your racist brain cannot wrap itself on the simple concepts of the LAW, like "all men are created equal", or "equal protection under the law".

Instead you use the LAW to beat people into submission, who actually have broken no law. At least none that you, or your daddy's daddy have not broken.

I take heart though, that not all Euro-immigrants share your narrow RACIST right wing views, and are better potty trained in the morality of the rule of LAW.

PS

Most of the US was SOVEREIGN Mexico. That makes many Latinos and even South Americans natives to the land.


Really Now... Illegals are illegal, they have always been illegal, even when the racist Democrats were in office. Its called the LAW. No country on Earth allows just anyone to show up and live there... NONE. I suppose every country on Earth is run by Racists too? INCLUDING the ones where the little criminal bastards came from.

Its racist to believe Latinos (Blacks, Asians, etc... etc... )are better than everyone else on Earth, and that they alone are above any and ALL of our laws.

ALL of which by the way ARE Constitutional...

.

[/B]Tal, you are a true reversionist, they didn't cross the border because they thought it is their land, they did it for economic reasons.

Smoothy is wrong you can't dump your problem on someone else, it is your problem, they have been allowed to stay there, and through a cruel political deception, they revealed themselves and made themselves more vulnerable.

As children they are not criminals, it is a stupid idea to say they are criminals
THey weren't born here, they aren't citizens of this country... they have no right to be here. Sending them back to their country of origin IS right and its legal. Children can be and often ARE criminals. Take a look at the Juvinile Justice system, and look at the Murders these "Children" commit daily.

We have a law.. you HAVE to come here legally or you are here ILLEGALLY.

If a 12 year old shoots your WIFE to death... are they not criminals? Damn right, as they are if they break any other law.

And about Mexico... Gee... since when was Spanish a native language outside SPAIN, MOST people in Mexico and south are NOT 100% indiginous natives. MOST have European backgrounds who stole that land.. so no way in hell does Mexico have any moral OR legal high ground on this.

Trump is right . The emperor made law that he has no right to make under our system. Trump threw the ball back in Congress court where it belongs . Don't give me all this compassion garbage . Where is your compassion for all the so called dreamers who came here the year before the cut ? Spare me your tears .

I have no problem with the law being changed as long as Congress makes the law. We suffered for 8 years with the emperor's pen and cell phone . Enough is enough . Time to go back to the rule of law.

You remind me of the guys who ran from the bear, and when you got to the cabin, you closed the door behind you, on the ones who couldn't run as fast as you could. Didn't matter they were your women and children. Trump is right, congress should act. If they don't then the ball is back in his court. Even a broken watch is right twice a day.

Lets not forget Obama acted to protect children, when the congress didn't act! Dufus acted because his loony right wing base was poking him with a sharp stick up his arse. So he punted to the do nothing congress.

He better be careful because repubs may decide to poke him too. That wouldn't surprise me at all.

@ Smoothy

Your peeps weren't born here either. Stop being a grouchy sourpuss.

@ Tom,

Read my rant! We all know there is law to protect you, so you can order me illegal, and criminal.

And your peeps weren't born here either.

Let's cut to the chase . The children brought here 5 years ago will be the next group of dreamers who will be protected by some unconstitutional dictate .This is the same 1 time amnesty crap that the Dems pulled in 1986 . Come on Charlie Brown ;kick the ball again !

Your charade don't fool me . Why don't you just admit that you won't be happy until there are open borders ? Come on ;if not tell me where is the line ? Should a 15 year old who is not covered under your unconstitutional DACA be protected ? A 10 year old ? A 5 year old ? A 1 year old ? Tell me how many of these 'dreamers ' were being rounded up and thrown out before the emperor's edict ? Answer ;zero . There hasn't been such a round up since the Ike years .

Still ,if that was the law of the land then so be it . You shouldn't have any trouble getting it through Congress. The Dems want voters to replace the middle class they lost ;and there are enough Repubics on the payroll of the cheap labor lobby to get it done right .

https://www.uscis.gov/archive/consideration-deferred-action-childhood-arrivals-daca

You may request DACA if you:


Were under the age of 31 as of June 15, 2012;
Came to the United States before reaching your 16th birthday;
Have continuously resided in the United States since June 15, 2007, up to the present time;
Were physically present in the United States on June 15, 2012, and at the time of making your request for consideration of deferred action with USCIS;
Had no lawful status on June 15, 2012;
Are currently in school, have graduated or obtained a certificate of completion from high school, have obtained a general education development (GED) certificate, or are an honorably discharged veteran of the Coast Guard or Armed Forces of the United States; and
Have not been convicted of a felony, significant misdemeanor,or three or more other misdemeanors, and do not otherwise pose a threat to national security or public safety.


The rules seem clear enough to me but what really burns my butt is after following the rules and paying your fees, some Yahoo comes and changes the rules.

Trump's decision to end DACA, explained | PBS NewsHour (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/trumps-decision-end-daca-explained/)

Why now?
In June, 11 attorneys general — from conservative states like Texas, Arkansas, West Virginia and Kansas — threatened to sue the Trump administration unless it took steps by Sept. 5 to end the program. For months, senior Trump administration officials have expressed concern that DACA would not stand up in court. Attorney General Jeff Sessions also reportedly (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/03/us/politics/trump-daca.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news) told the president the Justice Department would not defend the program.

Political implications
The decision will be popular with Trump’s base, in particular with hard-line immigration opponents on the far right who have opposed DACA since the moment it launched five years ago. But like some of Trump’s other controversial decisions that appealed to his base — such as the proposed travel ban and ban on transgender people serving in the military — ending DACA won’t play well with moderate Republicans.

And King Reagan was the PREZ in 1986. But maybe you need some background.

A Reagan Legacy: Amnesty For Illegal Immigrants : NPR (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128303672)

And I just can't stand Turd Sessions lying happy a$$ talking his racist crap. Calling people who work productively and even serve our country CRIMINALS?? That's a lie because immigrants have always come here looking for a better life. Their home countries were in complete turmoil, and chaos. They should be given the same chance the Euro's had when there were wars and devastation, in there countries. And yeah they sent for their whole family too!

We can do better than we have in the past

The U.S. Government Turned Away Thousands of Jewish Refugees, Fearing That They Were Nazi Spies | History | Smithsonian (http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/us-government-turned-away-thousands-jewish-refugees-fearing-they-were-nazi-spies-180957324/)



Most notoriously, in June 1939, the German ocean liner St. Louis and its 937 passengers, almost all Jewish, were turned away from the port of Miami, forcing the ship to return to Europe; more than a quarter died in the Holocaust.


Go ahead ignore history, and keep repeating BS!

THey weren't born here, they aren't citizens of this country... they have no right to be here. Sending them back to their country of origin IS right and its legal. Children can be and often ARE criminals. Take a look at the Juvinile Justice system, and look at the Murders these "Children" commit daily.

We have a law.. you HAVE to come here legally or you are here ILLEGALLY.

If a 12 year old shoots your WIFE to death... are they not criminals? Damn right, as they are if they break any other law.

And about Mexico... Gee... since when was Spanish a native language outside SPAIN, MOST people in Mexico and south are NOT 100% indiginous natives. MOST have European backgrounds who stole that land.. so no way in hell does Mexico have any moral OR legal high ground on this.

Smoothy, there is a vast difference between those who have committed a crime, such as you describe, and those who have not.
A child who accompanied a parent cannot be said to have acted freely, but I gather there may have been unaccompanied minors and that is surely a different position. You said send them to Canada, that is an indefensible position, deporting "law breakers" to another country.

As to sending them to their country of origin, I expect that would raise the intelligence level of both countries, and certainly would make Mexico want to pay for the wall. If you return them to Mexico all you will have is another group who want to recross the border and a ready target for recruitment by drug smugglers.

If you send them to the country of origin you need to send the parents too so that all may survive.

Trump is right in striking down an unconstitutional presidential decree and there is need to tidy up the status of many millions, not just these "children".

The rules seem clear enough to me but what really burns my butt is after following the rules and paying your fees, some Yahoo comes and changes the rules.


The rules you quote were the result of a Yahoo changing the rules like the tin pot dictator he was . Trump would've been justified to end them today . He gave you open border people a window to change the law constitutionally . I suggest that you use the time wisely.

Your example of refusing refugees is a poor comparison. That was not rounding up people who were here illegally . The German Jews turned away AND the internment of thousands of AMERICAN CITIZENS of Japanese descent was courtesy of Liberal hero FDR .

Exactly.

The rules you quote were the result of a Yahoo changing the rules like the tin pot dictator he was . Trump would've been justified to end them today . He gave you open border people a window to change the law constitutionally . I suggest that you use the time wisely.

Your example of refusing refugees is a poor comparison. That was not rounding up people who were here illegally . The German Jews turned away AND the internment of thousands of AMERICAN CITIZENS of Japanese descent was courtesy of Liberal hero FDR .

Why don't you create an amnesty for all those already there who can demonstrate they have not broken any other law, and deport the rest, close the borders, so there are no day trippers either way, and sit quietly for a while contemplating your navel, which is the special skill of all those in Congress and the Senate

The republicans would gain great political kudos from this and truly uphold their tradition of emancipation. There is a lot to be said for holding the political high ground

Your example of refusing refugees is a poor comparison. That was not rounding up people who were here illegally . The German Jews turned away AND the internment of thousands of AMERICAN CITIZENS of Japanese descent was courtesy of Liberal hero FDR .

It was cruel no matter who did it. But amnesty was by a conservative hero...Reagan.

It was cruel no matter who did it. But amnesty was by a conservative hero...Reagan.

Yes, Reagan has a lot to answer for. Amnesty, fall of the Soviet Union

As much as I have criticized King Reagan, and disagreed with his policies, I must credit his tax policy he implemented with the democratic congress as being fiscally responsible, and common sense. It added flexibility to the economic well being of the country, and set the stage for subsequent ability of having a balanced budget under Clinton. Pappy Bush boxed himself in a corner, and got booted out after his first term by promising no new taxes, until reality and fiscal responsibility required he too had to raise taxes, to avoid a financial budgetary shortfall.

And how did Clinton balance the budget with Newt and the repubs in the congress? He raised taxes and closed military basses. Baby Bush came after and started two military incursions into Iraq and Afghanistan off the books, and blew all the money on tax cuts for the rich that allowed corporate America to spend all kinds of money overseas, and destroy the Global Economy with their taxpayer funded schemes, tricks, and traps.

Obama will never be credited for righting the ship that Baby Bush nearly sunk, or leaving The Dufus with a solid foundation, and stable economy on which to build. He brought structure and certainty back where there was chaos and confusion, but conservatives repubs and certainly not the loony fringe was willing to do anything to help continue the effort. Instead they hollered and screamed and tried to seize power, and to a great extent, succeeded by opposing EVERYTHING that made sense.

Now they have to govern, but their fiscal plans favor the oligarchs again, who are already fat and happy with overseas money extracted from CHEAP SLAVE labor, while they holler for MO"MONEY and that means YO" MONEY. They holler the tax rate is too high on them, yet none of them pay the highest rates. And none of them pay their workers MO"MONEY! Indeed TAX payers have been subsidizing wages for the working poor for decades.

And tell me more about that big beautiful wall that Trump wants to build that you can see from space! Repubs are full of crap!

Why don't you create an amnesty for all those already there who can demonstrate they have not broken any other law, and deport the rest, close the borders, so there are no day trippers either way, and sit quietly for a while contemplating your navel, which is the special skill of all those in Congress and the Senate

The republicans would gain great political kudos from this and truly uphold their tradition of emancipation. There is a lot to be said for holding the political high ground


But amnesty was by a conservative hero...Reagan.

Clete there was a blanket amnesty in 1986 (Simpson–Mazzoli Act,).It was the result of a deal between Reagan and the Dems . It was supposed to be a one shot deal and in exchange there would be tough enforcement of immigration laws ;especially on employers who hire illegals .

Very few of the eligible illegals took advantage of the law and none of the enforcement aspects were vigorously enforced .

This whole debate cracks me up . Trump saved the precious unconstitutional Dreamers rules . It was made by executive fiat and could've been reversed the same way . The thanks he gets is demonstrations and vile spewed at him as demonstrated in this op. There were many state's AGs who were days away from challenging it in court .The emperor knew that his actions were unconstitutional . But the Dems don't give a rat's A$$ about the rule of law .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=22&v=Gw4BIWiWyQg

here is a video from the "double faced bozo " ,"moronic jackass".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKa8KYT-NSI

Doing the right thing may be against YOUR rules but like you said rules can be changed from one exec to the next. So tell me why Dufus didn't just rescind Obama's EO, and be done with it, case closed?

for cynical reasons no doubt . But his action is the correct one. Congress makes law not the President .

That's true, but presidents must act when the congress doesn't, and who wouldn't act on behalf of children? You have to admit this congress hasn't acted very much, not even on easy stuff. I don't blame Trump much actually for passing this hot potato to the congress and maybe sparing himself some heat from his base. I think he's lucky Mother Nature has dominated the news cycle, and will for many days to come.

but presidents must act when the congress doesn't,

There already was a law . Obama made a rule he knew was unconstitutional .



maybe sparing himself some heat from his base

His base is seeing the fraud they supported . It actually took longer for them to recognize it than I though . Some of the hardliners will still blame the swamp creature Repubics ;but I don't see how they can stomach Trump going all in with the Dems.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=30&v=nltXQOIrPH8

more proof herr Donald is all in with the Dems .

Trump’s Justice Department Lets Lois Lerner Off The Hook | 710 WOR (http://710wor.iheart.com/content/2017-09-08-trumps-justice-department-lets-lois-lerner-off-the-hook/?cmd=managed_social)

and who wouldn't act on behalf of children?

Bubba Clintoon . He sent men with automatic weapons to kick a child refugee out of America . And the Dems cheered .

Tom you keep telling us that Trump is a closet democrat, I seem to remember telling you that before he was elected.

I also seem to remember the democrats were the party of slavery and repression, how were they allowed to switch their agenda and fool your nation?

Dems and repubs both believe in economic slavery Clete to some extent. No Trump is no true republican, nor is he a true democrat. He will use whatever it takes to get what he wants. He will play ball with whomever. Didn't he start his campaign for president by blasting repubs? He brags often how he kicked ALL their butts, so for sure he is beholding to neither party.

It is weird that the southern democrats became republicans and northern republicans became democrats as a fallout from the civil war which is still being fought but with less blood. It was all about civil RIGHTS and who had them in the first place. They started with the premise on paper anyway that "All men were created equal", when in reality was no they weren't. We have been trying to live up to those words ever since. Well some have but many do not believe completely in the words of the founders, so they resist for whatever reason.

the big shift came 1964-1968 when liberal Repub Nixon started the 'silent majority ' law and order campaign while the Dems were rioting in the streets of Chitown ....and roughly around the same time that LBJ introduced the modern welfare state (“I’ll have those ni**rs voting Democratic for 200 years.”).

It is weird that the southern democrats became republicans and northern republicans became democrats as a fallout from the civil war which is still being fought but with less blood. It was all about civil RIGHTS and who had them in the first place. They started with the premise on paper anyway that "All men were created equal", when in reality was no they weren't. We have been trying to live up to those words ever since. Well some have but many do not believe completely in the words of the founders, so they resist for whatever reason.

But the founders didn't believe that, they were slave owners and made sure their status wouldn't be disturbed in their lifetime. All men are equal only in appearance but nature tells you that some are stronger than others. It needed law to give some men rights the strong would not allow and the strong will not allow others to be equal with them

All men are equal only in appearance but nature tells you that some are stronger than others.


The Constitution doesn't read "All men are equal". It says "All men are CREATED equal". There's a world of difference.

The Constitution doesn't read "All men are equal". It says "All men are CREATED equal". There's a world of difference.

Isn't that what I just said, your Constitution was only made to protect the rich, just like the earlier version, the Magna Carta, on which it is allegedly based. Some of your founders decided that those who are not equal should have guns so they have the illusion of being equal, or something like that

Isn't that what I just said, your Constitution was only made to protect the rich, just like the earlier version, the Magna Carta, on which it is allegedly based. Some of your founders decided that those who are not equal should have guns so they have the illusion of being equal, or something like that


The Constitution is not based on the Magna Carta although it is certainly in the same line of the lesser powerful challenging the more powerful. This idea (as you know) goes far back - the Hebrew Biblical prophets crying out to Yahweh for justice for the poor, Confucius and Jesus admonishing all men to "do unto others", and the many others down the years slowly, step by painful step, always flawed but always reaching for that perfect document or system by which humans can effectively govern themselves. We're not there yet.

My point --- the 250-year-old Constitution is also not a perfect document, but it wisely contained both progressive and conservative elements and, most importantly in my view, it allowed itself to be amended as the need arose. I don't think it is fair to characterize it as "made only to protect the rich". That is an anachronism and an invalid one at that.

The more serious charge is that the composers of those stirring words promoting a just society were themselves guilty of the most unjust actions by holding in bondage an entire group of people based on nothing more than their skin color. This original sin was partially paid for in a bloody war whose embers are not totally extinguished yet. We continue to pay for the sins of our fathers.

Trump doesn't see America with its historical evolution. He sees America only as a giant cheeseburger, for him and his friends to chomp on and continually practice their hedonistic ways. He has turned the American dream upside down. No longer "tired masses yearning to breathe free", but "keep out the Muslims and send those Mexicans back where they came from".

I think SOME Republicans are FINALLY starting to get it. They are the only hope to rid our country of this megalomaniac.

I think SOME Republicans are FINALLY starting to get it. They are the only hope to rid our country of this megalomaniac.

Do you think the true Republicans want to do that? They want to


keep out the Muslims and send those Mexicans back where they came from".

As a good Republican should. There is some sort of strange idea Republicans were emancipationists, they were not. Lincoln wanted to win without freeing a single slave, he could not. Lincoln did not want a coloured population in the United States and true to their roots nor do the Republicans. Had Lincoln survived he would have campaigned to deport coloured people, why should Trump, if he is a true Republican, do any less? Trump hasn't promised to govern for all the people and if he did, I wouldn't believe him

No longer "tired masses yearning to breathe free",
The Statue of Liberty was not about that .The French gifted it to us because the US was a beacon liberty for the rest of world .It was not about come to America to experience liberty .It was build your liberty there .The surest way to ensure the continuance of despotic regimes is to have the dissident leave the country rather than to fight for their rights.

The poem 'The New Colossus' was for a fund raising effort to build the statue's pedestal .It does not form the basis of US immigration policy . The only immigration policy that makes sense for any nation is what is in the best interest of the nation. Historically the US has had immigration policies that were open and at times restrictive based on the needs of the nation. There are historically restrictions . Next to the Statue of Liberty is Ellis Island . Every immigrant coming into New York were screened at Ellis Island before being allowed entry into New York. Many an immigrant were denied entry even though they had made it so far to almost touch Lady Liberty.The rate of immigration ebbed and flowed .After 1820 when we had a vast amt of territory to fill almost anyone was welcome . The US even gave away free land . By the 1920s the frontier was filled and strict quotas and enforcement followed .

The sentiment of the poem does not reflect anything about United States immigration law. Instead, immigration law consists of regulations and statutory law that ensures the protection of the border as well as opening doors to individuals and families who come to the United States legally. The law does not advocate an unvetted process for people to arrive in the United States simply because they are "tired, poor, or your huddled masses." To insinuate that immigration policy should be an open borders system simply because it makes one feel good does nothing positive for the United States and its citizens.

The sentiment of the poem does not reflect anything about United States immigration law

Seems to me it is time for that statue to be taken down too! It no longer reflects the mood of the people

Beam me up Scotty! There is no intelligent life on Earth! We can try again in a few centuries.

This is the only chance you get

The sentiment of the poem does not reflect anything about United States immigration law Seems to me it is time for that statue to be taken down too! It no longer reflects the mood of the people

Doesn't reflect Aussie immigration policy either .Do you take in people just because they are refugees ? No of course not . You keep them in detention centers with the promise that if they behave themselves ,there is a chance they can emigrate to the US . Of course you won't allow them in even though you have mostly an unoccupied continent .

Doesn't reflect Aussie immigration policy either .Do you take in people just because they are refugees ? No of course not . You keep them in detention centers with the promise that if they behave themselves ,there is a chance they can emigrate to the US . Of course you won't allow them in even though you have mostly an unoccupied continent .

You are not usually so uninformed Tom so I'm assuming you are having a personal go at me.

Let us deal with the unoccupied continent myth first, we don't know anyone who wants to come and occupy the parts we haven't already occupied, not even the indigenous people want to live there, and even when they were the only people here their numbers were small after 60,000 years, just half a million. There is a reason why we live near the coast and it is called water, you may have heard of it. Your country appears amply endowed with it at the moment

Now refugees and immigration. We have an immigration policy which let's in about 200,000 a year and among them are refugees, properly vetted offshore. We do not allow any Jasime and Abdul who decide they want to live here to come, but we know you are happy to accept every Juan and Rosetta who cross your border. We have even offered to take some off your hands in a swap, because we like good Christian people, but before the flood starts, the same rules apply to them. You might wonder why we don't take more and the answer is economic, inflation, lack of housing, employment, we don't want people starving to death and we don't want them in the welfare system.

We keep illegal "immigrants", aliens who have entered the country illegally, in detention as a deterrent. Any half arsed deals we did with Obama have come to nothing. We offer them deals so they can go home with a little money because, like your own circumstance, we don't want them to stay. We got on top of this drowning at sea nonsense before it became popular in the mediterranian. We did not want the same thing as happened in Europe. You may think this is heartless and we should just let them come and park them in the middle of the desert, but the abo's would probably eat them, goanna being a little scarse these days