Yes, for example, overstaying your visa. Then we can arrest you, toss you in jail, and deport you.
If this is what you believe is happening, then I can't imagine you think there is an immigration issue?
If you think this isn't happening, then why aren't law enforcement being jailed for failure to enforce the law?
Very good. That's the issue. Why have we been failing to do this?
The FedEx stuff is just election talk. We aren't going to do that because the tourism industry would throw a fit. But when someone's visa expires, and we know that they haven't left the country, why aren't we picking them up and sending them home? You and I know the reasons, and so do most if not all of our politicians. It has nothing to do with liberty.
Yes we do. I alluded to it in a prior response to you stating that "I'd let you decide what you think the reason is. Our govt, in deference to business interests, has no interest in mass deportations. Another reason why a Guest Worker Program makes the most sense.
Also, for the record, We currently can NOT do as you suggest and instantly jail an "overstayer" then deport them. Our current Visa agreements do not allow for deportation until after adjudication. That's why folks are not jailed. An exception to these rules is that of the case of "overstayers" who entered through the Visa Waiver program. By accepting visa waiver status, these visitors accept that they can be immediately deported and an ICE officer who is willing to visit them upon official contact with the govt is authorised to issue a departure order immediately. _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
The person in the article has one suspicion. My personal suspicion is that during NSA metadata collection, someone with a flag popped up in that area and the US requested a "stop & swipe" to see if the party in question was indeed in transit? Considering that they don't seem to stop every bus, per the description given by the person who wrote the account.
Also, The Co-Traveler program collects all cell phone transmissions and tracks them tower to tower, American citizens abroad included. The NSA doesn't deny this. If "Co-Traveler" flags a cell phone on a NSA list, then it could also be confirmed with a "Stop & Swipe". There could be a myriad of other reasons as well. The point is that they obviously have such capacity in place, What for?
Why would Croatia and Montenegro help the NSA collect data on Americans? Hey, I'm not going to deny that the government collects all sorts of data about us, and I'm not going to deny that the government does nefarious things. This just seems like an odd example to prove the point.
Under the guise of "terrorist tracking". If an American is believed to have an affiliation with a suspected terrorist, the NSA is legally restricted to how they can monitor him on US soil. But whilst he's traveling internationally, all bets are off. If the govt has an interest in an Americans activities, he can much more closely monitor his actions whilst he travel abroad, and gather more concrete evidence than they are able to legally target and maintain whilst he's at home. Scanning the passport of every American can be used as a credible defense against any specific American being targeted since their legal basis for their right to do so whilst an American travels abroad is based more on theory than precedent. _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
In the AH vein of masochistic questions, why is this a thing? Are we having some sort of overstay their visa and destroy the country problem?
Your point is taken. We've absolutely no reliable number on Overstayers. The percentage at any given time is estimated to be as low as 10% of the Alien total, and as high as 25%. In any event, the overwhelming majority of overstayers leave on their own accord, and don't generally experience any problems until the next time they attempt to travel to the US. When they attempt reentry, they get denied, and get a letter which allows them to see an Immigration judge, sometimes as much as 2 years later. And they have to pay their own expenses to come back to the US to receive temp immigration papers to attend that adjudication hearing. Needless to say, most don't likely try, but again - there aren't any statistics on that.
But in the vein of your question - this has didly to do with our immigration issues and the whole suggestion of a tracking scheme is just right wing silliness. If we instituted a Guest Worker program tomorrow, our "immigration problem" would suddenly come close to disappearing, and those nefarious students who stick around 3 weeks past their Visa's would become the only real immigration issue -obviously of little consequence. _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
In the AH vein of masochistic questions, why is this a thing? Are we having some sort of overstay their visa and destroy the country problem?
Ok 24 but to be fair, you could say this about almost any issue.
If you waited until something because a real problem to contend with, then you've waited too long and you'll blame party X. If it is dealt with up front, then you'll blame party X for dealing with something that isn't a problem that is destroying the country yet.
For me, it is a matter of principal and not being ok with being wishy-washy. We have a visa program. The program has expiration dates for the visas. We should enforce them. If we don't want to, or, the cost is too prohibitive, then fine. Then let's eliminate the expiration altogether and perhaps, as a measure of control, hand out fewer no-expire visas.
I'm just not much a fan of "faking it". Part of policymaking should be enforcing them and if we're not going to do that (for multiple reasons many of which may be justified) then let's get rid of the policy already.
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90306 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 4:29 pm Post subject:
ringfinger wrote:
24 wrote:
In the AH vein of masochistic questions, why is this a thing? Are we having some sort of overstay their visa and destroy the country problem?
Ok 24 but to be fair, you could say this about almost any issue.
If you waited until something because a real problem to contend with, then you've waited too long and you'll blame party X. If it is dealt with up front, then you'll blame party X for dealing with something that isn't a problem that is destroying the country yet.
For me, it is a matter of principal and not being ok with being wishy-washy. We have a visa program. The program has expiration dates for the visas. We should enforce them. If we don't want to, or, the cost is too prohibitive, then fine. Then let's eliminate the expiration altogether and perhaps, as a measure of control, hand out fewer no-expire visas.
I'm just not much a fan of "faking it". Part of policymaking should be enforcing them and if we're not going to do that (for multiple reasons many of which may be justified) then let's get rid of the policy already.
I get all that, but the question remains:
Other than as a nativist agitation device, is anyone really saying we have a large scale problem in this area?
In the AH vein of masochistic questions, why is this a thing? Are we having some sort of overstay their visa and destroy the country problem?
Ok 24 but to be fair, you could say this about almost any issue.
If you waited until something because a real problem to contend with, then you've waited too long and you'll blame party X. If it is dealt with up front, then you'll blame party X for dealing with something that isn't a problem that is destroying the country yet.
For me, it is a matter of principal and not being ok with being wishy-washy. We have a visa program. The program has expiration dates for the visas. We should enforce them. If we don't want to, or, the cost is too prohibitive, then fine. Then let's eliminate the expiration altogether and perhaps, as a measure of control, hand out fewer no-expire visas.
I'm just not much a fan of "faking it". Part of policymaking should be enforcing them and if we're not going to do that (for multiple reasons many of which may be justified) then let's get rid of the policy already.
I get all that, but the question remains:
Other than as a nativist agitation device, is anyone really saying we have a large scale problem in this area?
I don't think anyone is saying that. And I'm not sure what qualifies as "large". That's why I'm saying, it's moot. If you make a policy, enforce it. If it is not proper or efficient or reasonable to enforce, don't have the policy at all.
If one's strategy is to wait until things become a large scale problem, you'd never head it off at the pass. And then you know what would happen? When it becomes a big problem, you won't be able to do anything about it because the impact would be too severe (i.e. Birthright citizenships)
A large scale problem? I suppose that some would say that 10-25% of the undocumented alien population is enough to be a large scale problem. I've heard numbers as high as 40%, but I'll accept Aussie's numbers for purposes of this discussion.
My problem is that we have somehow gotten to the point at which it is just accepted that we don't enforce our own immigration laws. When we have hundreds of thousands and probably millions of visa overstayers, and we aren't doing anything about it, it makes the whole system look like a sham. That may in fact be the truth, of course, and this fuels public anger toward the whole system. There is also a nasty undertone to this. Care to bet that the demographics of the visa overstayers would look strikingly different from the demographics of the much vilified and stereotyped illegals from south of the border?
As you know, I am not on board with the nativists like Trump. I'd have no problem with a guest worker program as suggested by Aussie, or with any other rational reform of the system. Having said that, I understand exactly where Christie and others are coming from on this issue. It's a low hanging fruit for the GOP, but that doesn't mean that they don't have a point.
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29281 Location: La La Land
Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 7:21 pm Post subject:
I think Rush Limbaugh found a way to figuratively and literally refer to women as sexual objects with his "solidarity of the vaginas" comment. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
A large scale problem? I suppose that some would say that 10-25% of the undocumented alien population is enough to be a large scale problem. I've heard numbers as high as 40%, but I'll accept Aussie's numbers for purposes of this discussion.
My problem is that we have somehow gotten to the point at which it is just accepted that we don't enforce our own immigration laws. When we have hundreds of thousands and probably millions of visa overstayers, and we aren't doing anything about it, it makes the whole system look like a sham. That may in fact be the truth, of course, and this fuels public anger toward the whole system. There is also a nasty undertone to this. Care to bet that the demographics of the visa overstayers would look strikingly different from the demographics of the much vilified and stereotyped illegals from south of the border?
As you know, I am not on board with the nativists like Trump. I'd have no problem with a guest worker program as suggested by Aussie, or with any other rational reform of the system. Having said that, I understand exactly where Christie and others are coming from on this issue. It's a low hanging fruit for the GOP, but that doesn't mean that they don't have a point.
Being Mexican myself, I can vouch for this.
I have several relatives who have bee granted visas and they make sure to abide by the rules set by immigration. You'd be surprised how scared they are of losing it, and they don't take any gambles with the system.
Also - the whole wall thing, I laugh at it. Donald Trump and that nativist are really out of touch with how hard it actually is to get through to the states. We are talking $5k+ in cash paid to a smuggler for one person with a very very low success rate. Hell, I've heard of people who stay at the border for months and fail dozens of times; at the end they just end up going back to their home town.
That wall would have been a great idea in the late 70s/early 80s when you could almost walk in. Way different these days, but I guess that speaks volumes as to how informed some people are these days.
Yeah, well, since building a wall worked so well for the Chinese, why not us?
As I've said before, the whole "wall" concept is one of the reasons why I became disaffected with the GOP after 25 years of being a staunch Republican. It's such an obviously stupid idea that it made me start thinking that maybe the folks in my party were playing me for a fool. Once you realize that you're being distracted with rhetoric, you start asking the hard questions that they don't want you thinking about.
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29281 Location: La La Land
Posted: Tue Sep 01, 2015 8:05 pm Post subject:
So the party that desires less government wants to spend billions on a federally funded wall equipped with military style drones.
Makes sense. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 Posts: 67620 Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2015 7:31 am Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
No, Donald is going to make Mexico pay for half of it. Try to keep up, dude.
I heard him say that but didn't hear how he was going to accomplish the feat. Does he have some kind of agreement with authorities in Mexico? _________________ Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
No, Donald is going to make Mexico pay for half of it. Try to keep up, dude.
I heard him say that but didn't hear how he was going to accomplish the feat. Does he have some kind of agreement with authorities in Mexico?
Of course there's no agreement. He just says whatever pops into his head with no regard for facts, reality or practicality. But apparently those are attractive qualities to the GOP base. The same GOP base who still believes Obama wasn't born in the Unites States and is a secret Muslim -- and this is from a poll 2 days ago, not 2 years ago.
President Obama on Wednesday was handed a major foreign policy victory after securing enough votes in the Senate to preserve the nuclear deal with Iran, which has come under intense criticism from Republicans and some Democrats.
The agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions struck by international negotiators in Vienna earlier this summer was the subject of an intense lobbying campaign in recent weeks by both the administration and the deal’s opponents in advance of an expected vote this month on a resolution to block the deal’s implementation.
But Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.) on Wednesday morning said she will back the agreement, making her the 34th senator to pledge support for the Iran deal in the Senate. This means that opponents will not be able to collect the two-thirds supermajority vote needed to override Obama’s promised veto of any legislative attempt to dismantle the nuclear pact.
“No deal is perfect, especially one negotiated with the Iranian regime. I have concluded that this Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action is the best option available to block Iran from having a nuclear bomb,” Mikulski said in a statement explaining why she is backing the deal. “For these reasons, I will vote in favor of this deal.”
Iran Nuke Deal Secured _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
So the party that desires less government wants to spend billions on a federally funded wall equipped with military style drones.
Makes sense.
In no way can either party claim to want less government.
Governments are built to self perpetuate. There is no such thing as a government that desires to shrink itself. Just another bit of fools gold that politicians try to sell. _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90306 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2015 10:42 am Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
A large scale problem? I suppose that some would say that 10-25% of the undocumented alien population is enough to be a large scale problem. I've heard numbers as high as 40%, but I'll accept Aussie's numbers for purposes of this discussion.
My problem is that we have somehow gotten to the point at which it is just accepted that we don't enforce our own immigration laws. When we have hundreds of thousands and probably millions of visa overstayers, and we aren't doing anything about it, it makes the whole system look like a sham. That may in fact be the truth, of course, and this fuels public anger toward the whole system. There is also a nasty undertone to this. Care to bet that the demographics of the visa overstayers would look strikingly different from the demographics of the much vilified and stereotyped illegals from south of the border?
As you know, I am not on board with the nativists like Trump. I'd have no problem with a guest worker program as suggested by Aussie, or with any other rational reform of the system. Having said that, I understand exactly where Christie and others are coming from on this issue. It's a low hanging fruit for the GOP, but that doesn't mean that they don't have a point.
I get and understand the technical argument. But there are lots of laws we ignore. Jaywalking is an epidemic. The thing is, there isn't any fundamental wedge to use it for. At the end of the day, I'm not seeing the evidence for the effects of our lax policies. Illegals and stayovers are actually net positives to our economy, and are less likely than most to cause crime problems as well.
If there was public demand to enforce the jaywalking laws, cops would do it. In some places, they actually do. There is a public demand to enforce the immigration laws. But we don't. Illegals and overstayers may be net positives, but they aren't supposed to be here.
The result of this is an immigration system that is not only fraudulent but an inefficient tool to promote hidden agendas. This inhibits robust and honest public discussion of the underlying issues, and it provides fodder for nativists and opportunists. That's not a technical argument.
Joined: 02 May 2005 Posts: 90306 Location: Formerly Known As 24
Posted: Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:48 pm Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
If there was public demand to enforce the jaywalking laws, cops would do it. In some places, they actually do. There is a public demand to enforce the immigration laws. But we don't. Illegals and overstayers may be net positives, but they aren't supposed to be here.
The result of this is an immigration system that is not only fraudulent but an inefficient tool to promote hidden agendas. This inhibits robust and honest public discussion of the underlying issues, and it provides fodder for nativists and opportunists. That's not a technical argument.
Now you're getting to my point. Neither law is robustly enforced for structural reasons (except where those reasons surface, such as high number of accidents in the case of jaywalking). What causes immigration public opinion isn't really structural or even personal (try, as I have, on many occasions, to engage a rabid immigration law advocate on specific issues that this is raising for them. You will get blank stares and generalities. I have yet to get a specific, personal issue). It is driven by folks with an interest in driving nativist fears. If you know where someone is getting their news, you can almost directly gauge whether or not they are big on the issue. It is a wedge issue pure and simple, mostly built around fear of the other.
If there was public demand to enforce the jaywalking laws, cops would do it. In some places, they actually do. There is a public demand to enforce the immigration laws. But we don't. Illegals and overstayers may be net positives, but they aren't supposed to be here.
The result of this is an immigration system that is not only fraudulent but an inefficient tool to promote hidden agendas. This inhibits robust and honest public discussion of the underlying issues, and it provides fodder for nativists and opportunists. That's not a technical argument.
Now you're getting to my point. Neither law is robustly enforced for structural reasons (except where those reasons surface, such as high number of accidents in the case of jaywalking). What causes immigration public opinion isn't really structural or even personal (try, as I have, on many occasions, to engage a rabid immigration law advocate on specific issues that this is raising for them. You will get blank stares and generalities. I have yet to get a specific, personal issue). It is driven by folks with an interest in driving nativist fears. If you know where someone is getting their news, you can almost directly gauge whether or not they are big on the issue. It is a wedge issue pure and simple, mostly built around fear of the other.
Of course it is. Generally, when you can eliminate more than half of a "problem" with the simple stroke of a pen - it isn't really a "problem" per se. If tomorrow Congress offered legislation which simply stated that those industries that already primarily employ immigrant labor are allowed to legally hire those who have registered as guest workers, then -POOF - 95% of the border jumpers would no longer be "illegal". They'd simply be folks going to work this week exactly as they did last week. The overwhelming majority of Americans wouldn't notice a thing because the "problem" isn't really a "problem".
The situation we have is:
1) American Employers desire these immigrant employees
2) American workers do not want to do these jobs
3) Immigrant employees desire these jobs
Where's the problem? _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
This is being reported on MSNBC. Pagliano ID'd as person who set up server
I can't deny this looks bad for Hillary.
Yeah, Biden's just waiting for the furor to reach it's pinnacle before he announces. Sanders is already eroding her lead, but since most don't consider him a serious contender, when they look to an alternative just so they don't have to be nervous with Hilary furor following her into the general election, Biden is likely to get a nice little bump. Then all that's left is for Hillary to do something typically Hillary and figure out another way to lose from ahead. Neither of them are very inspiring, but Biden doesn't have the scuzz factor weighing on him. I'm not really looking fwd to 4-8 more years of watching the Clintons dragged through the mud simply because they're hated by the opposition. At least they'd likely be somewhat civil towards Biden since they're not comfortable making voodoo dolls in his image. _________________ I'm On point, On task, On message, and Off drugs. A Streetwise Smart Bomb, Out of rehab and In denial. Over the Top, On the edge, Under the Radar, and In Control. Behind the 8 ball, Ahead of the Curve and I've got a Love Child who sends me Hate mail.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
I think Rush Limbaugh found a way to figuratively and literally refer to women as sexual objects with his 
