I offer my opinion when I have one – there are topics on which I don’t claim to know enough to have one. The actual inside-one’s-brain-beliefs of people I’ve never met often fall into this category.
Why does it matter? I think he might believe it, or he might just be an idiot with language. I don’t even think it matters – people don’t get passes for saying something racist just because they don’t believe it. If he doesn’t believe it, he still shouldn’t be saying things like that.
Sure it matters. If you think he actually thinks that all Mexicans are rapists he’s not only a racist, he belongs in an asylum, because it’s an incredibly stupid thing to believe. Especially since he has thousands of Mexicans working for him. If you grant that he, like any sane person, does not hold the opinion that all Mexicans are racists, then you have to assume that there’s a more reasonable way to parse the language.
Seems like you want to keep open the possibility that Trump does, in fact, believe that all Mexicans are rapists, so you can heap more derision on him, even if it is not deserved. And even though you know damn well that he does not hold that opinion. So I call BULLSHIT on your “Oh, I can’t know what is inside someone’s brain.”
Okay, I don’t believe he believes all Mexicans or immigrants (every single one) are rapists, but he might believe most of the male immigrants are or might be, or most of them aside from the “good people” he added at the end, or that being Mexican means one is inherently more likely to want to rape, or something like that. I don’t know if he holds racist anti-Mexican views (which is how I interpreted your question, rather than literally, 'cause that would be silly), and I won’t claim to have an opinion on that.
Maybe everyone can agree that Trump is an idiot–or just doesn’t express himself very well–and then just move on…?
I agree with Pool on this…there’s probably more fertile ground for an interesting debate here than the contents of Donald Trump’s thoughts.
-VM
Yes. Moving on, here’s what wonderful results the vile, unAmerican policy of “sanctuary cities” has wrought.
Well, done, San Francisco. Well done Obama for not doing your goddamn job.
They should make those assholes who establish sanctuary cities personally responsible for all the crime that can be tied back to the policy.
I know this case has been getting a LOT of play around here in the Bay Area, and I’m sure, in conservative circles.
And yet, I can’t help but think of the old adage: “Bad cases make bad law.” This seems to me to be a really bizarre situation. We shouldn’t revise our entire legal structure based on this one event.
If you’re under the impression that there aren’t many other similar stories, you’d be mistaken:
Keeping a sex slave for 18 months: POLICE in the US have arrested an illegal immigrant who allegedly imprisoned a 27-year-old woman as a sex slave in his booby-trapped home for 18 months…
The illegal alien serial rapist: On Wednesday, U.S. Marshals brought Baltazar Gabriel Delgado-Ros, 28, back to Palm Beach County (Fla.) where he was wanted for the rape of five women.
) The illegal alien who murdered a woman driving him to the hospital: Meet 27-year-old Julio Miguel Blanco-Garcia.
An illegal alien who molested a child and was paid 4 million dollars by Orange County, CA:
An illegal immigrant rapist who had been deported 9 times:
The illegal immigrant terrorist who planned to blow up Jewish synagogues:
A 13-year-old gang raped by illegal immigrants: A little 13 year old girl was gang raped by a bunch of illegal immigrants.
There are plenty more. And plenty more to come, ICE released 30,558 more violent illegal scum earlier this year…
What are such stories supposed to prove, other than the fact that shitty people come in all colors and national origins?
The point is that if we had secure borders and enforced the laws we have regarding illegal scum, the people in the stories would not have been raped, murdered, etc.
It’s try that people of all stripes can do those things, and any one of us might be a victim at some point. But there is no reason that we should be victimized by people who should not even be in the country.
To me that’s an argument for better enforcement and alertness for criminals, not banning them all (which is impossible anyway). If we went the other way – if their peers had become legal immigrants through reform, perhaps they would have felt free to cooperate with police in rooting out the scum in their own communities. Since most immigrants (whether illegal or not) are fine people, I don’t think the answer is to get rid of 'em all. I want to keep the good ones (e.g. most of them).
Then let’s lock down the border. Once that’s done we can then craft an immigration policy that makes much more sense. Including what to do about the XX million already here. But until the border is secure and the current laws are enforced, we’re going to have more of the same. There is no reason to think otherwise. At the same time, the last thing we need to do is craft any policy that makes it even more desirous for people to find a way here. So, we shouldn’t consider things like amnesty—not until that border is locked down and we have a reasonable way to handle those who are here illegally committing felonies.
But where we probably begin our disagreement is at your rather cavalier attitude about illegals being her in the first place. I find it astounding and antithetical to the rule of law. Really.
Would you include the Canadian border as well? I understand that the vast majority of immigrants are currently coming over the Southern border (or via any one of America’s fine international airports), but if the Mexican border were locked down, I imagine we’d have a sudden influx of immigrants coming by sea and across the Canadian border.
I’m not particularly opposed to “locking down the border”, as long as it’s at a reasonable expense (and done in a humanitarian fashion – no spotlights and machine guns!). It’s reasonable for a country to exert control over its borders.
I’m not sure it can be done at a reasonable expense, though.
In my mind immigration, whether legal or illegal, is very ‘American’, and a big part of our culture and tradition. Through most of our history we didn’t exert much control over immigration, and I think this made us better. I’m not advocating for 100% open borders, but the relative trickle of illegal immigration doesn’t bother me and (in my mind) helps America more than it hurts America. Since I believe most of the immigrants (illegal or not) are good people who would be great Americans, and since the volume isn’t particularly high right now, I’m not particularly worried about it.
It’s mind boggling to me that anyone can view illegal immigration as not a huge problem facing the country. It’s the biggest problem we have. Even if we believe the government, they claim over ten million illegals are here already. The real number is probably closer to 30 million. We’ve taken in 25% of the population of Mexico. How many more must we take? 50%? 100%?
Border security would be nice to have, but it’s not the only solution. Require identification before someone can be hired. Crack down on people hiring illegals. Actually deport illegals when they are caught doing criminal acts. If someone has been deported before and is caught in a criminal act again then put them in prison for decades. Hit illegals in the US with high tax rates. Heck, make it 100%. Use the IRS to confiscate assets and money from illegals when they are found.
Stop all the bad policies such as:
Family reunification, which means one anchor baby can end up leading to dozens of people coming in
Giving endless benefits to illegals
Asylum rules that make no sense
No more Tsarnaevs.
The marathon bombers came here on a tourist visa. They got asylum so they stayed legally, despite the fact they regularly traveled home to visit. They collected over $100,000 in benefits from various government programs while they were plotting how best to kill us on a massive scale.
This current system we have is indefensible.
Immigrants should be allowed to come in based on our needs, not theirs. We should let in Doctors, and other desirable professions. People we admit should speak English, they should have to legally wait in line not jump a fence, and they should have degrees and no criminal records. How can anyone disagree with this?
Was *your *family subject to any of those requirements?
My family didn’t break the law by coming here. They didn’t break in, as so many illegals do now by jumping a fence. They didn’t break the rules, as so many do now by ignoring the expiration of a visa.
Times change. We had unrestricted immigration in the past when we had a labor shortage and needed people.
I answered your question. Now answer mine: How many more people from Mexico (just to name one country) must we take in? We’ve got a quarter of them. Do we stop at half? What’s the number? Is there any limit?
Sure. But the system we have now basically precludes all legal migration from Mexico. Fix that, and we won’t have nearly as many problems with illegal migration.
I question the validity of this claim.
Yes, your occupying a job means someone else cannot. But by residing in Canada, you and you children increase the demand for goods and services, and thus increase the number of available jobs. After you make your money, you must buy food, clothes, rent an apartment, get a cell phone, and all that jazz, creating jobs in those sectors.
As it happens, Canada does in fact have a very high LEGAL immigration rate, and has for quite a long time, and yet does not have growing unemployment; that’s because while immigrants displace native workers, they simultaneously create the demand for more workers. If low paid immigrants put people out of work Canada would have a catastrophic, Depression-level unemployment rate by now - over 20% of people living here are immigrants, quite a bit higher than the USA (the number in Australia is a staggering 27%, a country that also does not have a job catastrophe) and yet the unemployment rate is low. The legality of your residence in Canada really isn’t going to change the economics of it much.
Apples and oranges. Canada has a Guest Worker Program, where people apply in Mexico for jobs in Canada. Those who get the jobs are given a 6-month Visa, where they can come and go as they please. This is what we should have. First, the number of workers is based on actual need—the need for the worker is what spurs the application process. Two, since the workers are legal, and the need for them already exists, they don’t have to undercut existing wages nor work/live in the shadows. Third, it ensures that the people coming in have been checked out.
Even going back to the huge influx of immigrants that came through Ellis Island, people were checked out. And many, many were sent back directly from Ellis Island. There was no sense of “an open border policy”. Also, it is important to understand where the country was in terms of our need for workers. It was great. This is when the great cities were being built. It benefitted us greatly to have people to do the work. This is not the case now. We have a very high number out of the work force, and unemployment among low-skilled blacks is woefully high.
But even if the majority would make great Americans, as you say, you need to lock down the border to be able to let that group in and keep the murdering, raping, child-molesting, gang-banging, drug dealing scum out.