Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: FPP Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Nex Benedict Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 09:39:43 -0400 Organization: Ph'nglui Mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh Wgah'nagl Fhtagn. Lines: 210 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: fredp1571@gmail.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 13:39:43 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="866255e9d7f6f21dcf5228058326e7a5"; logging-data="3146420"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18uI5fOEOFNmgOBdMIZzozN" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 Cancel-Lock: sha1:b9BHIs/qEhHjrTDiPXgYrGSeq5c= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 12377 On 3/8/24 9:40 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > In article , FPP > wrote: > >> On 3/6/24 12:45 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> In article , FPP >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 3/4/24 1:58 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>> On Mar 4, 2024 at 5:56:21 AM PST, "FPP" wrote: >>> >>>>>> Republicans themselves said this is the most far reaching bill, and >>>>>> includes everything they've been asking for for 20 years. >>>>> >>>>> The week Biden took office, he issued 94 executive orders to open the >>>>> border and stand down enforcement of immigration law. >>>>> >>>>> Until Biden rescinds those EOs, any claims he makes that he wants to >>>>> address illegal immigration are nothing but lies. >>> >>>> So answer his question. What was in the bill that was bad? >>> >>> I already did an in-depth analysis of this abomination several weeks >>> ago, which you completely ignored and only responded to by insulting >>> Trump as per usual. Why should I do it all again just for you to ignore >>> it again? >>> >>> Oh, hell, hope springs eternal and it's easy to copy and paste so here >>> goes: >>> >>>> The Republicans got most of what they wanted and that still wasn't >>>> good enough >>> >>> Of course it wasn't good enough. And I don't know who you're referring >>> to specifically by 'the Republicans' but anyone who isn't a RINO got >>> next to nothing from this bill with regard to border security. And >>> that's being generous. >>> >>> Even as hundreds of thousands of illegals stream across the border every >>> month, including thousands of gang members recently kicked out of prison >>> in places like El Salvador, looking for a friendlier place to commit >>> their crimes, this 'border deal' would have done absolutely nothing to >>> secure the border. >>> >>> First, it's important to emphasize that no 'border deal' is necessary in >>> the first place. Under existing law, including the Immigration and >>> Nationality Act of 1952, the president of the United States has the >>> authority to turn every single illegal alien away at the border if he >>> determines it's necessary to safeguard the country, to include refugees. >>> There is no requirement that we entertain millions of fraudulent asylum >>> claims-- or even legitimate asylum claims, as rare as those may be. >>> >>> There is no legal requirement that we allow a single non-citizen into >>> this country. Period. >>> >>> All that's necessary to secure the border is for the president of the >>> United States to start doing his damn job and enforcing the law, to >>> start using the power that he *already* legitimately and >>> constitutionally has. It doesn't need to be complicated. We just need to >>> start enforcing existing laws as they stand. >>> >>> But if the White House actually adopted this simple and straightforward >>> solution, two things would happen: >>> >>> (1) The Democrat Party would lose out on millions of future loyal voters >>> once the next stage of their plan is implemented: the 'path to >>> citizenship' for all the illegals we let in and who now will be >>> described as leading an 'unfair' twilight existence in our society which >>> can only be solved by making them citizens. Democrats' longstanding >>> plans for demographic replacement at the polls would be stymied. >>> >>> (2) Congress would miss out on a chance to launder hundreds of millions >>> of dollars and Congress never misses out on an opportunity like that. >>> >>> So here we are. >>> >>> The bill proposed in the Senate would allocate another $60 billion >>> dollars in military aid to Ukraine and $14 billion to Israel. (We >>> already give Israel billions every year-- what have they been doing with >>> that? Where has that money gone that we need to dump $14 billion more on >>> their doorstep?) That's a grand total of $74 billion going to secure the >>> borders of other countries. By comparison, the bill only allocates $20 >>> billion for U.S. border security. >>> >>> So to restate for the slow kids in the back of the room: Our leaders are >>> proposing to spend roughly 400% more on securing the borders of two >>> other foreign countries than they are on securing the border of our own >>> country. >>> >>> And it gets worse. Because even the money that's supposedly going for >>> our border security will actually in practice only facilitate the entry >>> of millions of more illegal aliens into the U.S. Specifically, the bill >>> allocates $2.3 billion for something called "refugee and entry >>> assistance activities" by giving "grants or contracts to qualified >>> organizations and non-profit entities to provide culturally and >>> linguistically appropriate services, including housing, medical, and >>> legal assistance and ease management assistance". (Ease management >>> assistance? WTF? Why am I paying for that?) So that's more than two >>> billion dollars to the left-wing 'non-profit' organizations that exist >>> principally to find ways to sneak as many illegals into this country as >>> possible. >>> >>> By doing so, this bill actually creates more incentives for illegals to >>> come here in the first place. >>> >>> One of the highlights of the bill is that it requires the Executive >>> Branch to close the border on an emergency basis if the number of >>> illegal entries exceeds 5000 in one week or 8500 in one day. >>> >>> Except the bill also gives Joe Biden the authority to waive this >>> emergency requirement at any time at his discretion. So of course it >>> will never be enforced. He and DHS Secretary Mayorkas could effectively >>> just ignore this entire section of the law if it were passed. >>> >>> The bill also doesn't count unaccompanied minors from countries other >>> than Mexico and Canada toward the totals necessary for border closings. >>> In other words, a significant percentage of illegals from Haiti, Cuba, >>> Honduras, Pakistan, China, etc. simply don't count. We could have 20,000 >>> of those show up in one day and it wouldn't count. >>> >>> And on top of that, the bill doesn't *actually* close the border, even >>> if this fraudulent 5000-illegal threshold is reached. Per one of the >>> bill's co-authors, Senator Chris Murphy: "The bill contains a >>> requirement that the president funnel asylum claims to the land ports of >>> entry when more than 5000 people cross in a day. The border never closes >>> but claims must be processed at the ports." >>> >>> So basically even if these arbitrary numbers are reached, the border >>> never closes. The illegals are just re-directed to processing centers >>> where they are then let into the country. It's a complete scam by >>> design. And a scam that's designed to last for a long time, given the >>> bill's 3-year sunset provision. The idea being that if Trump does get >>> re-elected, he'd be bound by the terms of this deal and couldn't do >>> crazy things like ACTUALLY shut down the border and stop this >>> never-ending firehose of illegals. >>> >>> In one key respect, this bill would actually *lessen* the >>> already-minimal standards for allowing illegals into the country. Right >>> now, people applying for asylum need to show "a significant possibility >>> that they can establish a credible fear of persecution on the basis of >>> race, national origin, political beliefs, etc." Not a high standard. It >>> doesn't require them to provide any actual evidence of their claims. >>> Just make a claim, which they've been coached to say and which they've >>> rehearsed, and then get into the country. But this border bill would >>> lower that standard even further, if that's possible, from a >>> "significant" possibility of persecution to merely a "reasonable" >>> possibility of persecution. And reasonable is just another way of saying >>> 'plausible'. In other words, it's a bar that anyone from anywhere can >>> clear. There's no way that anyone claiming asylum will ever get turned >>> away if that's the standard. >>> >>> The bill is an abomination that makes the border *less* secure than it >>> already is, which is a remarkable feat that few, if any, people imagined >>> was even possible. >>> >>> Thank god the House Republicans said the bill was dead on arrival. But >>> it doesn't begin to explain why Senate Republicans thought there was >>> anything here that could possibly be considered good for America. >>> >>> It's as if the Senate is made up of politicians who despise their own >>> citizens and whose top priority is the safety of foreigners in other >>> countries thousands of miles from their own shores. And they know it. >>> >>> When you confront them on why they've utterly failed at the border, they >>> don't even try and justify their behavior. They just call you a racist >>> for even asking the question. There's no political calculation that >>> would explain their support for this nonsense. The American people, >>> Democrats and Republicans alike are overwhelmingly upset about what's >>> going on at the border. There's no support for it. >>> >>> Polls clearly show that no one's buying the idea that we need a nearly ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========