Jump to content

F250

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    17552
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by F250

  1. 20 minutes ago, troph said:

    you may be right in a lot of ways re current outcomes.  I don't think de-criminalizing completely is appropriate.  but I think separating families is wrong.  I don't think Beto was arguing separating families is ok, he is an advocate for a complete overhaul of the law.  but simply repealing criminalization does have it's own set of problems potentially.  and I don't think there is appetite for a full de-criminalization where there is room for fixing the child separation issue.

    I understand that Beto has a reform plan as does Castro but the issue over Beto's plan is that it doesn't go far enough to address the issue at hand which is the overuse of arrests being made for a misdemeanor that didn't come into play until the Bush Jr. administration.

    I believe Beto wants to stop separating families but based on the history of the past Presidents, I don't trust any future administration to not use this particular law as a weapon. As Castro pointed out, decriminalizing border crossings doesn't legalize drug smuggling or human trafficking. These crimes were being addressed prior to the Bush administration. It doesn't even prevent people from being deported after crossing illegally.

    There is a shit-ton of distrust within the Hispanic community right now and by going against decriminalization Beto puts himself on the people not to trust side. Fortunately for Beto, Hispanics don't vote in large numbers so not scaring off the white voters might work out for him. However, if Castro can rally the Mexican-American vote in Texas, he might prove himself as great resource and VP for whoever wins the nomination.

     

     

  2. 20 minutes ago, MidTexHorn said:

    My very evangelical mother just posted this little essay on Facebook from that paragon of Christian decency James Dobson: https://drjamesdobson.org/about/july-newsletter-2019?sc=hpslider1

    So much bullshit, I don't even know where to start. He acknowledges the fucking humanitarian nightmare of it all and then proceeds to blame the liberals and say that prayer for Trump and his Wall are the only fix (I'm paraphrasing). Unreal what so called Christians in this country have become. My mom was a fucking missionary in Central America for crying out loud, and this is what she has been reduced to.

    And there it is...

    "Their numbers will soon overwhelm the culture as we have known it"

    • Like 1
  3. 19 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Nuance.  Just because you take the money of the bad guys doesn't mean you'll be loyal to them forever.  That's kinda how this works.  You take the money to obtain power and then you screw them over once you're in power.   American politics in a nutshell really. 

    But that's not reality. If that were the case K Street wouldn't be a thing.

     

  4. 4 hours ago, troph said:

    outside of Warren who has every major issue handled in a Master's Thesis level detail, Beto is the best on immigration.  Castro screamed "what about Section 1325?!??!" way to many times and he's dead as wrong about it.  asylum is the bulk of the current immigration crisis and we need to honor that.  we need to work with other countries instead of tearing them down.  we need strong democratic central governments in central america.  there's a reason why Costa Ricans and Ecuadorians aren't fleeing to the US.  He outlined DACA and path to citizenship and then bluntly in the mayhem of "WHAT ABOUT 1325?!?!?" told Castro "if we reform immigration then I don't think it's too much to ask to require immigrants to follow our laws" and THAT is EXACTLY the right answer.

    Fuck this, Castro won that interchange.  He didn't, he was just louder.

    I disagree. Castro highlighted an issue that has been quietly occurring for a couple of decades. Trump uses the federal crime portion of the law to justify the separation of children along with his zero tolerance policy. Trumpkins justify these acts with "it's the law!"

    Leaving the misdemeanor on the books will only leave a tool for another Trump to build child prisons again. Hell, I don't trust any POTUS to use the tool humanely. Both Bush and Obama abused it and it took Trump going Final Solution for anyone to pay attention.

    The current problem with kids in concentration camps is a direct result of what Castro called out last night. Highlighting 1325 in front of a national audience in the way he did last night was a very Big Deal for immigration reform.

    It also cut O'Rourke off at the knees with the Hispanic vote. It didn't help that the Irishman decided to mutter a few sentences in broken Spanish. That was a bit insulting.

     

     

    • Like 1
  5. 6 hours ago, MAROON said:

    absolutely.  I've seen it for years.  The kid who is the beast at 12 years of age because he has already hit puberty gets passed in high school. The kid you are looking for is the one who is undersized but you can still see the skills. He will eventually be the stud while the bigger kid will quit the game when everyone grows to his size (or gets bigger than him).

    Something a lot of parents fail to do is look at themselves for an honest projection. If mom and dad are short and squaty with flat feet, the odds of Jr. not scaling up are pretty good.

    My son played with a man child that hit bombs over the fence. Now in high school that kid still hits bombs over the fence because he is a big ass man that scaled to the big field. This was an obvious outcome because dad is a 6'5 former college basketball player.

    On the other side, there was another kid who was undersized but highly skilled. The kid was under 5 feet at 12 years old but Dad was a 6'3 and mom was 5'10. Sure enough, kid sprouts at 15 years old and catches up with dad.

     

     

  6. 10 hours ago, Turkleton said:

    No reason to have borders, right?

    That's the conclusion a retard would come to isn't it?

    It's only been tried as a crime for less than 20 years.

    Like ICE, these things recently came into existence. Decriminalizing border crossings and abolishing ICE are just proposals to roll immigration back to pre- the Bush era. Nothing radical about that.

    9 hours ago, Js1 said:

    *Actually think it was Castro's plan first. 

    It was. Booker jumped on the train too. Expect a hard pivot from Beto soon.

  7. 2 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

    Imagine if the United States went really imperialist a 100 years ago and we owned all of Latin and South America.   This cruelty at the border is absurd when you really think about it, especially when you do a cost/benefit analysis.  

    It never happened due to the same reason we are having a humanitarian crisis at the border now.

     

    John C. Calhoun on why the U.S. shouldn't annex Mexico. Cliff notes version, it had nothing to do with respecting Mexican sovereignty but a simple desire to keep out brown skin people.

    The next reason which my resolutions assign, is, that it is without example or precedent, wither to hold Mexico as a province, or to incorporate her into our Union. No example of such a line of policy can be found. We have conquered many of the neighboring tribes of Indians, but we have never thought of holding them in subjection—never of incorporating them into our Union. They have either been left as an independent people amongst us, or been driven into the forests.

    I know further, sir, that we have never dreamt of incorporating into our Union any but the Caucasian race—the free white race. To incorporate Mexico, would be the very first instance of the kind of incorporating an Indian race; for more than half of the Mexicans are Indians, and the other is composed chiefly of mixed tribes. I protest against such a union as that! Ours, sir, is the Government of a white race. The greatest misfortunes of Spanish America are to be traced to the fatal error of placing these colored races on an equality with the white race. That error destroyed the social arrangement which formed the basis of society. The Portuguese and ourselves have escaped—the Portuguese at least to some extent—and we are the only people on this continent which have made revolutions without being followed by anarchy. And yet it is professed and talked about to erect these Mexicans into a Territorial Government, and place them on an equality with the people of the United States. I protest utterly against such a project.

    Sir, it is a remarkable fact, that in the whole history of man, as far as my knowledge extends, there is no instance whatever of any civilized colored races being found equal to the establishment of free popular government, although by far the largest portion of the human family is composed of these races. And even in the savage state we scarcely find them anywhere with such government, except it be our noble savages—for noble I will call them. They, for the most part, had free institutions, but they are easily sustained among a savage people. Are we to overlook this fact? Are we to associate with ourselves as equals, companions, and fellow-citizens, the Indians and mixed race of Mexico? Sir, I should consider such a thing as fatal to our institutions.

    The next two reasons which I assigned, were, that it would be in conflict with the genius and character of our institutions, and subversive of our free government. I take these two together, as intimately connected; and now of the first—to hold Mexico in subjection.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...