Schumer use to be against illegal immigration

#1
https://www.dailywire.com/news/39737/wat...n-saavedra

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in 2009 that construction of hundreds of miles of fencing along the southern border made the border "far more secure" because it created a "significant barrier to illegal immigration."

Schumer made the remarks while addressing the 6th Annual Immigration Law and Policy Conference at Georgetown University about the seven principles he said were the basis of an immigration reform package that he wanted to pass.

"The first of these seven principles is that illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple," Schumer said. "When we use phrases like 'undocumented workers,' we convey a message to the American people that their government is not serious about combating illegal immigration, which the American people overwhelmingly oppose."

"People who enter the United States without our permission are illegal aliens, and illegal aliens should not be treated the same as people who entered the United States legally," Schumer continued. "Any immigration solution must recognize that we must do as much as we can to gain operational control of our borders as soon as possible."

Schumer then explained that the construction of border barriers along the southern border made the border a safer place as it made it much tougher for migrants to illegally enter the U.S.

"The American people need to know that, because of our efforts in Congress, our border is far more secure today than it was when we began debating comprehensive immigration reform in 2005," Schumer stated. "Between 2005 and 2009, a vast amount of progress has been made on our borders and ports of entry."

"This progress includes ... construction of 630 miles of border fence that create a significant barrier to illegal immigration on our southern land border," Schumer explained.

WATCH:

Reply
#2
This apparently provides an entry for the Senate ML bookend. A selection for House Minority Leader was submitted six months ago, taken from 2014.

Nancy Pelosi in 2014: Let’s not politicize all of these children in detention facilities: . . . That was then but more recently Pelosi seems to have taken a different tack. After visiting a detention facility containing children in San Diego, Pelosi gave another press conference: "Our message to Mr. Trump is, stop this inhumane, barbaric policy..." [...] Granted these situations aren’t perfectly parallel, but in both cases the results were similar, i.e. immigrant children, many without their parents, crowded into U.S. detention facilities. In one case, Pelosi hesitated to even call it a crisis and hoped no one would waste time politicizing it ("It's not a crisis, it's an opportunity.") . In the other, she wasted no time politicizing it herself...

~
Reply
#3
Let's not forget who it is who has been politicizing the immigration issue for over 2 years now with fearmongering about the caravan and claims that immigrants are rapists and murderers just to please his craven xenophobic base. Ofcourse the bar is set so low for Trump we all just tend to overlook his non-stop bullshit tactics. But remember who the real politicizer is here.
Reply
#4
(Dec 29, 2018 09:25 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: Let's not forget who it is who has been politicizing the immigration issue for over 2 years now with fearmongering about the caravan and claims that immigrants are rapists and murderers just to please his xenophobic base. Ofcourse the bar is set so low for Trump we all just overlook his non-stop bullshit tactics. But remember who the real politicizer  is here.

Yet he hasn't done much Obama didn't do, and only done what both Schumer and Pelosi have agreed with in the past.
And there obviously are murders and rapist among those willing to start their lives in the US by breaking its laws.

Examples of Serious Crimes By Illegal Aliens
Manhunt underway after California cop killed; authorities say suspect in US illegally
VICTIMS OF ILLEGAL ALIENS MEMORIAL


The real politicizers are Schumer and Pelosi, who agreed with securing the border and curbing illegal immigration until it was politically expedient to wield as a club against Trump.
And you fell for it.
Reply
#5
(Dec 29, 2018 09:25 PM)Magical Realist Wrote: ... Ofcourse the bar is set so low for Trump we all just overlook his non-stop bullshit tactics. But remember who the real politicizer is here.


His public opponents don't overlook such anymore than vice versa. But otherwise, yeah -- I'd say a good part of us that have been observing Trump's behavior and antics for years before he ever became POTUS would feel like a dullard continually remarking or pointing out that: "Hey, watch your steps while walking around out here in the pasture -- there are paddies everywhere." Or a sight-seeing "Sure looks like it's going to be a dandy one right over there that's in the process of getting dropped."

Should also apply to career politicians, too, but they're so much more professional at it (an appearance of discipline, less unruly or feral posturing) that it seems we apply higher standards to them and don't feel as much like naive bumpkins remarking on some incidents.

~
Reply
#6
The irony is that Schumer and Pelosi honestly don't care about immigrants. They only care about their votes for Democrats. I imagine if they were asked to open their homes to illegal immigrants, they'd say no. But, as long as they're placed somewhere in the US...far away from them...they'll all for illegal immigration.

I think that there needs to be an overhaul of how one becomes a citizen. I read an article recently that it took someone 12 years to become a citizen. lol Maybe they should privatize the government, then stuff would actually get done. Just like I'm still missing a gift that was sent to me for Christmas, because of the postal service. Put Jeff Bezos in charge of the USPS, and stuff will get done, properly.

Shut the government down for good. And privatize it all.

Oops, sorry...went way off topic. Big Grin
Reply
#7
Yeah, the border wall is somehow immoral and ineffective, but not the walls around their homes. Lying hypocrites.

I'm all for government shutdowns. Let's find out what we truly can't live without and trim all the fat. What can be done by the private sector is always better than public, whether it's pools, transportation, tag agencies/DMV, taxi/ride sharing, shipping, etc., because the private sector is dependent on competing for customers.
Reply
#8
The same people who are for stronger gun control for us peasants, but they have armed body guards protecting them.

The reason I dislike the partial gov't shut down, is that it hurts people. It's not their fault, on a personal level, yet they have gone without pay now for weeks. I think Pelosi is refusing a deal because she knows the longer those people go without paychecks, they will likely vote against Trump.

Just my opinion.
Reply
#9
My view is that either many government employees wouldn't be voting for Trump anyway and/or that they're only hurt by the shutdown because they live paycheck to paycheck (as Pelosi said, with mortgages, car payments, and school tuition [private school?!]). I don't know that I want people being responsible for my government who can't live well-within their means and can't handle even one missed paycheck. That would seem to make them easy targets for corruption.

While private sector unions are drying up, public sector unions are still strong, and they give overwhelmingly to Democrats. And the federal employees that personally give to politicians also overwhelmingly give to Democrats.

Unions representing both federal and postal workers generally endorse, and give financial help through PACs to Democratic candidates.
...
Just before the 2016 presidential election, The Hill reported that “Federal government employees are opening their wallets to help Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump on Nov. 8.”

It checked Federal Election Commission records and reported that of the roughly $2 million given by feds in 14 agencies, “about $1.9 million, or 95 percent, went to” Clinton, the Democrat. It said that Department of Justice political donors gave 99 percent of their money to Clinton, while at the State Department, which she once headed, only 1 percent of the reported political contributions went to candidate Trump. It said that Trump got $8,756 from Justice employees, compared to $286,797 (at that date) for Clinton. Of the political contributions from Internal Revenue Service workers, 94 percent went to Clinton.
- https://federalnewsnetwork.com/mike-caus...ney-trail/


I guess if you like government dependence, it makes sense to be as close to the teat as you can manage to get.

Overall, I think it will be resolved, one way or another, and mostly forgotten in the rapid news cycle and short memory of the public long before the 2020 election.

The irony is that the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services is funded by fees, so immigration applications are likely still being processed.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Illegal alien protected from ICE 9x kills Syne 4 90 Mar 14, 2019 09:26 PM
Last Post: Syne
  Illegal drugs and prostitution boost Great Britain's economy Magical Realist 0 345 Sep 14, 2015 12:58 AM
Last Post: Magical Realist



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)