Trump to destroy the lives of 800,000 American children, and is too much of a coward to own it.

[Commodore]

It's like someone's found a way to give national character to socialist policies, for the good of American workers. Now if only you had some sort of party.

I see what you did there and it made me chuckle. I know a good joke when I see one.

 

[warpus]

I was low balling it with "conservative".
AfD politicians openly campaign with the Canadian immigration system as a positive example highly worthy of emulation.
That's right: The only people in Germany who like your immigration laws also want the police to shoot children at the border to prevent illegal immigration.
Spin that all you want...

Sounds a bit problematic if the only political party with a sensible immigration plan wants to shoot children en masse.

Then again hmmm I think different countries on different continents might exists in different contexts warranting different solutions to the same problems.

 

[Nexlev]

Children with an average age of 26.

 

[Zkribbler]

Schumer and Pelosi say they had dinner with Trump and reached agreement on all border security issues including the Dreamers but excluding the Wall, which will be negotiated separately.

The White House disagrees.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Schumer and Pelosi say they had dinner with Trump and reached agreement on all border security issues including the Dreamers but excluding the Wall, which will be negotiated separately.
The White House disagrees.

But Trump is the man who cannot lie ?

 

[metalhead]

The WH didn't really disagree, they just stressed that the Dems won't get DACA without more border security. And that there isn't a done "deal" until something actually comes up for a vote.

 

[Lexicus]

I was low balling it with "conservative".
AfD politicians openly campaign with the Canadian immigration system as a positive example highly worthy of emulation.
That's right: The only people in Germany who like your immigration laws also want the police to shoot children at the border to prevent illegal immigration.
Spin that all you want...

This reminds me of the situation in which a fairly liberal Swiss friend of mine mentioned Australia's immigration system as something to emulate. This was two or three years ago, mind, but I was still reading about the horrible conditions in the concentration camps the Australians have set up on those islands to keep the brown people out of their precious country. It depressed me horribly.

 

[Zkribbler]

But Trump is the man who cannot lie ?

That's what he told me

 

[Colon]

I'm not sure I get why the democrats are negotiating with Trump to pass a law to safeguard the dreamers' status. It's votes from republican lawmakers they need. Or is to prevent a veto?

Fox News: "Trump rips on Susan Rice". Sure, pretend Trump isn't collaborating with the enemy.

 

[metalhead]

The Republicans will not stand up to Trump, ever. Easy stuff like this, they will pass if he says so. And there is actually bipartisan agreement on DACA, so the veto threat was likely the biggest hurdle. For Republicans, they have to deal with Dems to avoid a filibuster.

 

[Oerdin]

This reminds me of the situation in which a fairly liberal Swiss friend of mine mentioned Australia's immigration system as something to emulate. This was two or three years ago, mind, but I was still reading about the horrible conditions in the concentration camps the Australians have set up on those islands to keep the brown people out of their precious country. It depressed me horribly.

Australia and Canada's systems are absolutely what we should be immulating and your casual false claims of racism are at best cringe worthy and full of ignorance. The European Union would currently be a hell of a lot better off and thousands of people of people would not have been drowned by mafia smugglers if such an intelligent policy was put into place right from the start.

Australia has a great policy which lets in genuine refugees who have passed the vetting process. What they will not do, what they have vowed to never let happen, is to allow illegal aliens to just flood into the country unchecked by cutting in line. Australia helps pay for safe UN camps and allows people in after they have been vetted by a clear fair legal process but if you try to cheat and come illegally then you are rightly told you will never be welcome in Australia.

This stopped the boat people over night because the cheats, fraudster, and economic migrants who simply wanted to abuse the refugee process to get around normal immigration laws quickly figured out paying the mafia people smugglers would not only not get them what they want but would actually get them barred for life. This policy saved numerous lives and put the people smuggling organized crime networks out of business.

I am going to be kind and just assume you are a truly ignorant person on this topic and that is why you posted garbage and provably false claims about nonexistent racism. It would be nice if you would retract those claims as they are so slanderous and unfounded it reflects very poorly upon you.

 

[innonimatu]

This reminds me of the situation in which a fairly liberal Swiss friend of mine mentioned Australia's immigration system as something to emulate. This was two or three years ago, mind, but I was still reading about the horrible conditions in the concentration camps the Australians have set up on those islands to keep the brown people out of their precious country. It depressed me horribly.

Genuine question, because I have not been following events on the other side of the world: do the australians impede those brown people from going back to where they came from?

 

[Oerdin]

Genuine question, because I have not been following events on the other side of the world: do the australians impede those brown people from going back to where they came from?

No, in fact they encourage it. Really, really encourage the would be illegal aliens to return by offering them money and free plane tickets. For those who refuse and who are found to be legit refugees Australia pays 3rd party countries to take them, if they were attempted illegal aliens who are now barred from ever entering Australia, or takes them in to Australia itself if the persons in question waited in line and did things via the legal process.

Personally, I think refugees should be returned home as soon as it is safe to do so as assylum was meant to be a temperary shelter not immigration by other means.

Furthermore, the points based immigration systems of both Australia and Canada are exactly the type of fair and impartial systems the US and UK should be copying whole sale. Including with its stress upon needed skills/education, ability to assimilate to their new country, and by returning people who fail to assimilate or follow the laws. Canada's strict but fair legal immigration system which focuses on the nation's needs combined with Australia's strict punishment/banning illegal aliens and law breakers is exactly what America's system SHOULD look like.

 

[Zkribbler]

The Republicans will not stand up to Trump, ever. Easy stuff like this, they will pass if he says so. And there is actually bipartisan agreement on DACA, so the veto threat was likely the biggest hurdle. For Republicans, they have to deal with Dems to avoid a filibuster.

Don't forget that in 2013, the Senate passes a similar bill, S-744, by 95%. The bill then went to the House, where a majority indicated they were in favor of it. But the GOP leadership refused to set it for a vote.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Well at least the Deplorables are going nuts over amnesty
Which is ironic given that Trump been employing mexicans, clothing made in China and hes own wife is an immigrant. But provided Trump himself throws out the correct dog whistle the Republicans dont care or are willing to overlook everything else.

Not only are they not going to get the Wall, It looks like Trump is going to provide Amnesty far in excess of anything Obama did.

 

[Samson]

Australia has a great policy which lets in genuine refugees who have passed the vetting process.

Do you believe the rohingya are genuine refugees?

 

[Camikaze]

This reminds me of the situation in which a fairly liberal Swiss friend of mine mentioned Australia's immigration system as something to emulate. This was two or three years ago, mind, but I was still reading about the horrible conditions in the concentration camps the Australians have set up on those islands to keep the brown people out of their precious country. It depressed me horribly.

Australia has a great policy which lets in genuine refugees who have passed the vetting process. What they will not do, what they have vowed to never let happen, is to allow illegal aliens to just flood into the country unchecked by cutting in line. Australia helps pay for safe UN camps and allows people in after they have been vetted by a clear fair legal process but if you try to cheat and come illegally then you are rightly told you will never be welcome in Australia.

It's worth separating out some different strands of Australia's policy, if you're talking about whether it's worth emulating, rather than treating it as one coherent policy.

The concentration camps run by the Australian government are clearly morally abhorrent and a crime against humanity. They're a monstrous policy tool designed to instill fear and ruin people's lives. But even from a sociopathic perspective, they're a pretty crappy option, costing an enormously disproportionate amount of money for extremely limited gain. It was recently reported (http://www.canberratimes.com.au/nat...detention-near-5-billion-20170716-gxci97.html) that the total cost of offshore detention over the last 5 years has been $5 billion, which is outrageous when we're only talking about a few thousand people. Detainees on Manus Island recently settled a $70m class action against the government, essentially for human rights abuses (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-...y-manus-island-detainees-compensation/8616672). So it's not a cost-effective means of controlling immigration. That element of Australia's immigration policy only exists for purely political reasons - the government over the last couple of decades has dug itself into a political hole they can't get out of, so they just keep descending further into depravity.

Of course, if you separate out the concentration camps - the means by which the Australian government controls the number of refugees arriving in Australia - there's an underlying end of limiting refugee numbers. That's something people can reasonably disagree about. Australia is a nation largely built by 'boat people', so the discussion of the appropriate number of refugees is heavily bound up with issues of Australian national identity, which are inapplicable in a non-Australian context.

There is difficulty in mapping the Australian immigration experience onto the US. Australia's 'illegal aliens' (a contradiction when speaking of refugees) are not economic migrants. American immigrants from Mexico generally are, to some extent. I don't say that in any sort of judgmental way, I simply observe that difference. A policy designed to limit the number of refugees who risk their lives to find sanctuary in Australia is not something which can sensibly be applied to the US context. Of course, Australia does have the points-based immigration system instead, but that's predicated on the idea that there's no physical prevention problem in relation to economic migrants to Australia. The 'stop the boats' policy and the points-based immigration system are two entirely distinct elements of immigration policy, which have pretty much nothing to do with each other. If the problem in the US is physically preventing people migrating from Mexico, then you're looking at something like 'stop the boats' ('build the wall'). If the problem is purely economic, you're looking at the points-based system. But the US problem is both, so there's a conflation of the two distinct solutions, as if they both apply at once in Australia.

Another point of difference is in the US' dysfunctional system of government. For non-Americans, Trump's excuse scans as entirely legitimate, because it's an absolutely correct attitude to take (ignoring the fact that it's fanciful for Trump to be concerned with good governance) - it's appalling from the perspective of proper governance to have an executive policy completely at odds with legislatively enshrined policy, creating some bizarro temporary 'legal illegal' category, because the legislature doesn't want to fix legislation. The American left's defence of migrants they acknowledge as 'illegal' provokes a double take for those in different systems; the debate in most countries isn't whether 'illegal' immigrants should be allowed to stay, but whether they are truly 'illegal'. But of course, given the dysfunctional nature of the US' system of government, that position from the left is quite understandable. But it certainly highlights the need for a legislative solution.

 

[Colon]

The Australian boat policy could be a model for post-Brexit Europe though. The UK could be Europe's offshore island to put concentration camps on in return for handouts.

 

[Broken_Erika]

The Australian boat policy could be a model for post-Brexit Europe though. The UK could be Europe's offshore island to put concentration camps on in return for handouts.

Reminds me of this Literary Classic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_English

 

[EnglishEdward]

Reminds me of this Literary Classic
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_English

That was an absolutely brilliant film!