This is Funny Coming From A Rebel Klansman Like Sessions

[Lek]

California doesn't want to waste any of their own time or resources on the "problem" of browns existing in their midst, RR.  It's really that simple.  

They've flatly stated that the fed can and will do whatever the fuck they want.  It's their lynching party, they can do the gruntwork themselves.  Sort of like how you'd probably insist that someone else service all the gay males in your vicinity.  No skin off your back...someone will, it just wont be you.  So, if the fed is looking to delegate for either task..perhaps they should stick to excited homosexuals and committed bigots?

When liberals don't have an answer to any question, they just scream racism. The question is "are we going to limit immigration into this country, and if we want to do this, are we going to enforce the laws which we have implemented"? I keep asking if anybody here is for open borders and nobody has answered "yes". It doesn't do any good to make laws and not enforce them. If you enforce immigration law then you're going to hurt a lot of"good" people. There are millions of "good" people who would like to come to this country.

[The Grand Nudger]

When liberals don't have an answer to any question, they just scream racism.  The question is "are we going to limit immigration into this country, and if we want to do this, are we going to enforce the laws which we have implemented"?

You keep saying "we" forgetting that your "we" is not their "we" or even our "we". "We" have no interest in border walls or ICE rounding up grannies and separating parents from children in detention facilities under the guise of going after "bad hombres". The apprehension of "bad hombres" has fallen off a cliff while ICE has more than doubled the number of people without any record getting rounded up at their places of employment or..worse, as they continue following immigration law specific to their situation and get denied stays or extensions. It's almost as if nobody wants to talk to ICE anymore..........

I keep asking if anybody here is for open borders and nobody has answered "yes".  It doesn't do any good to make laws and not enforce them.  If you enforce immigration law then you're going to hurt a lot of"good" people.  There are millions of "good" people who would like to come to this country.

I was responding specifically about california, that hasn;t expressed interest in any "open border" and has and continues to enforce immigration laws.  They're just not willing to spend their time and resources, again, on the feds specific agenda in that regard.  They don't seek to stand in the way, and they aren't going to help, mostly because it doesn't work, hurts law enforcement, hurts the economy..and is fundamentally fucking bigoted, lol.   Clear that up for you?

As far as finding somebody who wants open borders..well..I can be that guy.  There would still be laws and enforcement of laws, so it makes little sense to ask a person who advocates for open borders what the point of immigration law would be if we didn't enforce it.  An open border is a solution to some of the problems facing immigration law and border control. It would help us to enforce those laws. There would be no need for the Average Jose to engage the services of a human trafficker or to avoid talking to Johhny Law..and we;d spend less time chasing migrants in the desert (or the phantoms of migrants at the statehouse)..freeing up those resources to chase -actual- "bad hombres"...who would be the only people left with any reason to go skulking around.

Does that clear anything up for you?

[Lek]

When liberals don't have an answer to any question, they just scream racism.  The question is "are we going to limit immigration into this country, and if we want to do this, are we going to enforce the laws which we have implemented"?

You keep saying "we" forgetting that your "we" is not their "we" or even our "we".  "We" have no interest in border walls or ICE rounding up grannies and separating parents from children in detention facilities under the guise of going after "bad hombres".  The apprehension of "bad hombres" has fallen off a cliff while ICE has more than doubled the number of people without any record getting rounded up at their places of employment or..worse, as they continue following immigration law specific to their situation and get denied stays or extensions.  It's almost as if nobody wants to talk to ICE anymore..........

I keep asking if anybody here is for open borders and nobody has answered "yes".  It doesn't do any good to make laws and not enforce them.  If you enforce immigration law then you're going to hurt a lot of"good" people.  There are millions of "good" people who would like to come to this country.

I was responding specifically about california, that hasn;t expressed interest in any "open border" and has and continues to enforce immigration laws.  They're just not willing to spend their time and resources, again, on the feds specific agenda in that regard.  They don't seek to stand in the way, and they aren't going to help, mostly because it doesn't work, hurts law enforcement, hurts the economy..and is fundamentally fucking bigoted, lol.   Clear that up for you?

As far as finding somebody who wants open borders..well..I can be that guy.  There would still be laws and enforcement of laws, so it makes little sense to ask a person who advocates for open borders what the point of immigration law would be if we didn't enforce it.  An open border is a solution to some of the problems facing immigration law and border control.  It would help us to enforce those laws.  There would be no need for the average juan to engage the services of a human trafficker..and we;d spend less time chasing migrants in the desert (or the phantoms of migrants at the statehouse)..freeing up those resources to chase -actual- "bad hombres"...who would be the only people with any reason to go skulking around.

Does that clear anything up for you?

Well, for one thing, I don't agree that California enforces immigration law since, as a "sanctuary state" it protects those who break these laws, even convicted criminals. Second, you're welcome to your opinion, but it's a bad one. No country can survive as a nation without control of it's borders. Canada already found that out and discontinued allowing US citizens to cross their border without a passport. Atheists are big on facing reality. This is reality.

[Minimalist]

Given the nuts like you running around loose I can hardly blame Canada for not trusting 'murricans.  I think I'd be inclined to keep a close eye on them too.

[shadow]

You keep saying "we" forgetting that your "we" is not their "we" or even our "we".  "We" have no interest in border walls or ICE rounding up grannies and separating parents from children in detention facilities under the guise of going after "bad hombres".  The apprehension of "bad hombres" has fallen off a cliff while ICE has more than doubled the number of people without any record getting rounded up at their places of employment or..worse, as they continue following immigration law specific to their situation and get denied stays or extensions.  It's almost as if nobody wants to talk to ICE anymore..........


I was responding specifically about california, that hasn;t expressed interest in any "open border" and has and continues to enforce immigration laws.  They're just not willing to spend their time and resources, again, on the feds specific agenda in that regard.  They don't seek to stand in the way, and they aren't going to help, mostly because it doesn't work, hurts law enforcement, hurts the economy..and is fundamentally fucking bigoted, lol.   Clear that up for you?

As far as finding somebody who wants open borders..well..I can be that guy.  There would still be laws and enforcement of laws, so it makes little sense to ask a person who advocates for open borders what the point of immigration law would be if we didn't enforce it.  An open border is a solution to some of the problems facing immigration law and border control.  It would help us to enforce those laws.  There would be no need for the average juan to engage the services of a human trafficker..and we;d spend less time chasing migrants in the desert (or the phantoms of migrants at the statehouse)..freeing up those resources to chase -actual- "bad hombres"...who would be the only people with any reason to go skulking around.

Does that clear anything up for you?

Well, for one thing, I don't agree that California enforces immigration law since, as a "sanctuary state" it protects those who break these laws, even convicted criminals. Second, you're welcome to your opinion, but it's a bad one. No country can survive as a nation without control of it's borders. Canada already found that out and discontinued allowing US citizens to cross their border without a passport. Atheists are big on facing reality. This is reality.

Haven't followed your conversation, but...

You say 'no country can survive as a nation without control of its borders'. What about Europe? You usually don't need to show a passport at border crossings.

Also, its not hard to cross from Canada to the States without a passport, lol. Just walk or take a boat across anywhere but an official crossing and no one gives a crap. I've done myself.

[The Grand Nudger]

Well, for one thing, I don't agree that California enforces immigration law since, as a "sanctuary state" it protects those who break these laws, even convicted criminals.

Your agreement isn't a requirement, and your disagreement is uninformative.  California spends something like 65million a year detaining people for ICE, that's just one of the line items in their larger budget concerning immigration law.  Here is the reality of their sanctuary status;

California prohibits state or local law enforcement agencies from the following action:

• Detaining an individual on a hold request from the federal government unless there is a felony or a warrant;
  
  
• Transferring undocumented immigrants into federal custody unless they've been convicted in the last 15 years of a crime that is one of the listed offenses on California's Trust Act or the individual is a registered sex offender;
  
  
• Asking about a person's immigration status or sharing any information with federal immigration authorities that is not available to the general public.
  
  

Second, you're welcome to your opinion, but it's a bad one.  No country can survive as a nation without control of it's borders.

Why is that relevant?  Here again you're saying silly things.  A country with open borders still maintains "control of it's borders". So it doesn;t matter..to me..whether or not you think a country can survive without control of it;s borders..because I;m not advocating otherwise.

Canada already found that out and discontinued allowing US citizens to  cross their border without a passport.  Atheists are big on facing reality.  This is reality.

-and did this..in your estimation or theirs..make canada great again..or........?

[Brian37]

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/jeff-se...ry-cities/

Jeff Sessions accuses California of ‘secession’ and ‘nullification’ over sanctuary cities

California was on the side that kicked your asses, Sessions.  What ever happened to that states rights horseshit?

I do declare, such undignified language is giving me the vapors. How can I finish my mint Julep?

[GUBU]

Well, for one thing, I don't agree that California enforces immigration law since, as a "sanctuary state" it protects those who break these laws, even convicted criminals.  Second, you're welcome to your opinion, but it's a bad one.  No country can survive as a nation without control of it's borders.  Canada already found that out and discontinued allowing US citizens to  cross their border without a passport.  Atheists are big on facing reality.  This is reality.

Haven't followed your conversation, but...

You say 'no country can survive as a nation without control of its borders'. What about Europe? You usually don't need to show a passport at border crossings.

Also, its not hard to cross from Canada to the States without a passport, lol. Just walk or take a boat across anywhere but an official crossing and no one gives a crap. I've done myself.

For most of recorded history nations had a de facto open border policy. One of the main reasons Napoleon lost was because he tried to close his borders, pissing off all his subjects.

If Lek had any legitimacy at all in his assertion, civilisation would not now exist.

[Lek]

Haven't followed your conversation, but...

You say 'no country can survive as a nation without control of its borders'. What about Europe? You usually don't need to show a passport at border crossings.

Also, its not hard to cross from Canada to the States without a passport, lol. Just walk or take a boat across anywhere but an official crossing and no one gives a crap. I've done myself.

For most of recorded history nations had a de facto open border policy.  One of the main reasons Napoleon lost was because he tried to close his borders, pissing off all his subjects.

If Lek had any legitimacy at all in his assertion, civilisation would not now exist.

So the solution for the US is to have a de facto open border policy?

[GUBU]

So the solution for the US is to have a de facto open border policy?

With a shrinking and increasingly uneducated population, yes.