SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
posted by
martyb
on Sunday March 17 2019, @07:12AM
from the at-least-the-House-and-Senate-agreed-on-something dept.
from the at-least-the-House-and-Senate-agreed-on-something dept.
breitbart.com/politics/2019/03/15/donald-trump-vetoes-attempt-to-block-national-emergency
President Donald Trump vetoed a bill designed to block his emergency declaration at the Southern Border on Friday, in a ceremony at the White House.
“Today, I am vetoing this resolution,” Trump said. “Congress has the freedom to pass this resolution and I have the duty to veto it. And I’m very proud to veto it.”
Also at CBS News, CNBC, and USA Today.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Donald Trump Vetoes Attempt to Block his Declaration of a National Emergency
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 127 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Do not use if foil seal is broken.
(Score: 5, Touché) by SpockLogic on Sunday March 17 2019, @12:02PM (8 children)
Just like his *duty* to get Mexico to pay for it?
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 1, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Sunday March 17 2019, @01:07PM (7 children)
That's the bit that no one seems to get.
Each and every Mexican shipped back to Mexico, who IS NOT REPLACED by ten more Mexicans, is payment on the wall. Mexico's biggest industry is the smuggling of drugs. Mexico's second biggest industry is "remissions" from the United States. If the wall stops, or even slows, the flow of drugs and invaders, then yes, Mexico will have paid for the wall. It isn't even necessary to stop all of the drugs, or all of the illegal aliens. If we cut the flow in half, Mexico will pay for the wall, in the form of lost funds.
Abortion is the number one killed of children in the United States.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 17 2019, @03:46PM (5 children)
One of the few things Obama got right was coming up with a sensible way [nbcnews.com] to keep people from illegally immigrating. Get caught and you can't apply for legal immigration for a period of time (maybe two years?). Get caught multiple times and you're banned from applying for life. Of course, this requires that there is a credible legal way to immigrate, but seems a small price to pay for getting even a part of immigration policy that works.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 17 2019, @06:48PM (4 children)
It doesn't require that there be a credible legal way to immigrate. It absolutely does not.
We DO NOT have to accept these people. This is OUR nation. We can choose to accept ZERO and that is our right. This land is OUR land.
It is especially bad to accept any immigrant who would enlarge a significant non-English ghetto. This means that all Spanish-speaking people, without regard for country of origin, are really bad.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Sunday March 17 2019, @07:17PM
Tell that to all the greedhead CEOs who love the slave labor force with no rights, the Democrats who are cynically aiming for a larger voter base, and so on. THAT is your problem right there. The US could stop illegal immigration easily if it had the political will: destroy and nationalize any company hiring illegals. But it won't, because the system WANTS this. Which means you lot are being played for a fool by the very people stoking your anti-immigrant sentiment.
Wake up and smell the cafe con leche: the elite are using you *and* the illegals and playing you off one another. The illegals didn't steal your job; the elite did, and GAVE it to one of them.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday March 17 2019, @09:42PM (2 children)
Yes, it does. Because otherwise it's just an empty threat and would-be illegal immigrants have no incentive to stay out.
We had the same drama with Europeans (Poles, Germans, Scandinavians, etc). It sorted out fine.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 17 2019, @11:55PM (1 child)
We catch them. We flay them. Who will sign up for that? Obviously we don't just set them back on the other side of the border to try again.
Prison works too, as long as we take it seriously. We can outsource the prisons to El Salvador, Haiti, Democratic Republic of the Congo, North Korea, or any other place that would make prisons be an actual punishment.
The drama with Europeans was less severe except possibly for the Germans. It took a couple centuries to fully clear that up. We actually needed a world war against Germany to make speaking German be fully unacceptable in public. So... is your solution to have a world war against a Spanish-speaking country? IMHO that would really suck.
I don't want to wait 2 centuries to get my country unified again. I won't live that long. I'd suffer all my life, and my great-grandchildren would too.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday March 18 2019, @12:49AM
Eighth amendment precludes us from inflicting cruel and unusual punishments, such as flaying, for minor crimes like illegal immigration.
It never was a problem, much less one requiring a world war.
When was the last time it was "unified" in the way you claim? I think ignorance of history is biting you here.
(Score: 2) by Nobuddy on Monday March 18 2019, @03:06PM
An amendment to the US constitution says humans can no longer be used as currency. So we are back to cash.