Border walls are no longer racist

rodoheel said:
Meanwhile Elon Musk is on Twitter tossing out a bunch of tweets (including RTs and quote-tweets of Republican politicians and others) about preventing noncitizens from voting and accusing Dems of wanting to get immigrants into the country (and also accusing them of not wanting to deport criminal Democrats) because they vote Dem. All, of course, based on the completely fabricated premise that noncitizens are illegally voting in US elections, which is both entirely illogical and repeatedly has been proven to be a myth.

Just typical Republican logic - a solution in search of a problem. Republicans would totally be trying to get illegal immigrants to vote for them if they thought they could, so they just assume/project that Dems are doing it.
Click to expand...

The last place an illegal wants to be on Election Day is anywhere near a voting booth.
 
ZenMode said:
We should want to know who is coming into the country. CBP has caught people at the border who we don't want here. People can, and will, disagree on where the costs of chasing 100% security becomes too high.
The vetting and documenting is probably the most important aspect of immigration. Overstaying a visa doesn't change that.
The question of where walls are needed and where they aren't can be debated, but the fact remains that walls work.
Click to expand...
Agree we do want to know who is coming into the country, the primary reason for a comprehensive immigration reform bill. We also want those people coming into the country to be productive as quickly as possible.

Overstaying a visa is equally as illegal as crossing the border illegally, that's the point. That they are vetted doesn't change that fact. The point here is to see which is actually more important dealing with undocumented immigrants or just stopping people from crossing the southern border, while others who come into the country are not scrutinized equally.

I am very much in support of better policy. Policies that take into account the humanitarian needs, the labor needs, etc. Not just throwing up a wall because a bunch of people "Think" that will work.

Please provide links to these facts that the wall works. Pretty much everything I've read concluded that a wall is one of the least effective means of dealing with our border issues.

I've also read of environmental concerns in the areas where they have thrown up those god-awful ugly walls.

If we are going to put money into a border wall, can we at least make it something visually appealing as well as functional? Maybe like the Great Wall of China. We could turn it into a tourist attraction. It could be like the Appalachian trail and people could discuss how many miles of the wall they have hiked.
 
CRHeel94 said:
The last place an illegal wants to be on Election Day is anywhere near a voting booth.
Click to expand...
Seriously. I mean, the theories these GOP idiots come up with are nuts. In person voter fraud is vanishingly rare because nobody has any incentive to risk years of jail time -- even a tiny, tiny risk -- to cast a fraudulent ballot that will almost certainly have zero impact on the electoral outcome. And for illegals, the risk is even worse.
 
ZenMode said:
Agree. But the fact that they are vetted and documented decreases the likelihood that the person in the country "illegally" is dangerous.
Click to expand...
True, that make sense. But the OP didn't seem to be concerned with danger or vetting, he really seemed to only want to whine about once being called racist for his support.

As far as danger, from what I've read there is no greater chance of one being the victim of a crime committed by an undocumented person than being the victim of a crime be a naturalized citizen.

And, honestly, we are very fortunate to live in a country where the chances of us being the victim of a violent crime are minimal.
 
ZenMode said:
Agree. But the fact that they are vetted and documented decreases the likelihood that the person in the country "illegally" is dangerous.
Click to expand...
You know this how? Mohammed Atta was vetted. OJ Simpson would have sailed through vetting at age 30.

Statistically speaking, I would tend to agree that you're directionally correct. But if the vetted person is 1% less likely to be dangerous, it's basically nothing and not significant enough to affect policy. Do you know anything about the magnitude of the effect you're claiming?
 
superrific said:
You know this how? Mohammed Atta was vetted. OJ Simpson would have sailed through vetting at age 30.

Statistically speaking, I would tend to agree that you're directionally correct. But if the vetted person is 1% less likely to be dangerous, it's basically nothing and not significant enough to affect policy. Do you know anything about the magnitude of the effect you're claiming?
Click to expand...
Are you saying that vetting is unnecessary and we should run our current immigration/asylum program similar to Ellis Island?

If you aren't saying that, then you are acknowledging the importance of the imperfect vetting process.
 
According to NPR-

"Visa overstays have outnumbered people who enter the country illegally at the Southern border every year since 2007, according to a report by the Center for Migration Studies. The report's authors estimate that the number of total visa overstays was 600,000 more than the total number of border crossers and that in 2014, visa overstays accounted for two-thirds of all new undocumented immigrants.

Immigrants traveling through Mexico, of course, take up much of the public's attention on the issue of illegal immigration. And they do account for almost all people apprehended by CBP, which includes the Border Patrol. (Immigration and Customs Enforcement largely works in the interior of the country.)"
 
ZenMode said:
Are you saying that vetting is unnecessary and we should run our current immigration/asylum program similar to Ellis Island?

If you aren't saying that, then you are acknowledging the importance of the imperfect vetting process.
Click to expand...
I meant to say exactly what I said. Nothing more, nothing less. I am generally in favor of vetting. We were vetting at Ellis Island long before the idiotic immigration caps were put in.
 
This really has been awesome; a great learning experience for me. Good to know that ideas like this:


www.newsweek.com

Ilhan Omar: Trump's Border is a 'Monument to Racism'

"This is a fake emergency! Donald Trump is lying about the border in order to build his monument to racism," Omar tweeted on Wednesday.
www.newsweek.com www.newsweek.com

www.nbcnews.com

Opinion | Trump's border wall is meant to remind all Latinos that we're unwelcome

The White House's xenophobia has empowered others to say that Latinos don’t really belong in America.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

www.nytimes.com

Opinion | Trump’s Wall of Shame (Published 2019)

It would stand as a lasting reminder of the white racial hostility surging through this moment in American history.
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

were never put forward on these boards; I just made it all up.
 
Lmfao still can’t find those screenshots of anyone on this board ever having called the border wall racist, huh, Flo? Bless your heart. What a bizarre obsession. Some might even call it weird!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top