h
o
l
y
s
h
i
t
Just for clarification, most of my post was aimed at listening to a day of âLady Liberty shed tearsâ and not at whatever you were saying 
I wasnât the only one parroting the media narrativeâŚ
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/826060143825666051
The US only accepts a relatively small number of refugees. The majority of them* are in the countries you listed.
This is a little older, but you get the idea.
*EDIT: and by them, I mean Syrian refugees. Thereâs hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees in Europe. IIRC, there are millions of Syrian refugees in Turkey. The US brought in around 12,000 last year, and the allotment Obama was looking for was around 10,000.
How long ago did you come over?
The values our nation was founded on are embeded in the preamble of the Declaration of Independance.
Iâll save you the search.
âWe hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happinessâ
There are those of us that also belive itâs out duty as a nation to ensure not just Americans, but the world as a whole should have every oportunity to achive those rights as well.
I agree on illegal immigration, but thatâs not really what weâre talking about.
No, we certainly canât take care of everyone, but there are those of us that beleive we should help where we can. Whether thatâs becuase of our faith or personal convictions. I advocate for social programs to help those in need. I volunteer and donate resources where I can. I grew up just above the poverty line, and Iâm doing pretty well for myself, so I do what I can to help. I refused to be cowed by the sort of cowardice so many people express based on misinformation, or plain ingnorance. I have a far better chance of getting struck by lightning or killed by a drunk driver or boater than being killed by a refugee.
Your whole post leads me to one question. What makes you worthy to come here as a refugee and not anyone else?
I also believe in helping people around the world but that doesnât mean we are obliged to help every single person that asks for it.
I came in 98 as part of a refugee program in Russia for persecuted Christians.
I am talking about illegal immigrants, thatâs why I say people like me who went through the process legally (twice in my case) and if I was turned away in 98, I would have respect the USA government decision and would not have acted like the US owes it to take me in. My point is , donât lump illegal immigrants and legal ones in the same box. Putting a hold on immigration from 7 countries does not betray our Americanism. If there was a halt on immigration from the whole for the next year or more, I would have a problem with that unless it was temporary in order to put in place a new immigration system that isnât as stupid as it is now. Dont get me started on the love letters, dating pictures etc I had to provide to the state department to bring my wife here
Again, we all know that it is just a sensationalized talking point for one party. The idea that halting immigration indefinitely from one country and temporary from a few others for a few months is this great evil is dumb. How do you get anything done if you canât control your own immigration system when itâs needed? It makes no sense. Which brings me to something else, 99% of these people donât want to be here in the USA. If their country was not ravaged by certain forces, they would never have come here in the first place or ever wanted to and thatâs actually aomething I listened to many times on BBC last year.
I think this is where most of our current divide on immigration/foreign policy comes from. Thereâs a lot of people in the country, myself included, that are tired of the cost and fallout from trying to push our ideals on the rest of the world. The United States, or any nation for that matter, needs to stop acting like every other country in the world should believe what we believe and if they donât they must be saved. Concentrate on providing life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness here at home and let the rest of the world chase their own dreams. And yes, I bolded pursuit for a reason. Far too many in this country think the founding fathers meant to guarantee them happiness and theyâre entitled to it. No, youâre not. Youâre entitled to life and liberty which provide you the opportunity to bust your ass and earn some happiness. Happiness isnât a right or a guarantee, only the pursuit of it. Itâs on you to go out and get it.
And thatâs what I believe. What do they tell you to do when a plane goes down? Save yourself first, then worry about others. Same logic applies here. US citizens come first. The whole America First concept. At this point the nation has to be rebuilt from the inside. 20 years ago I was amazed at America, today we are in dire need of a refresh. Just believing in âAmerican idealsâ wonât mean a thing if we are falling apart.
Please donât mistake my intent. Iâm not saying we should enforce that on the rest of the world. Iâm not in favor of America in a role as âWorld Policeâ, or military adventurism typically pushed by Fiscal Conservativesâ˘.
I think we should help people, where we can, who are attempting to escape tyranny, war or oppression. I think the refugee program is one of the places we can do that. In other words, helping others part of our pursuit of happiness. By our, Iâm referring to people in support of helping refugees, etc. Not the nation as a whole. Clearly, not everyone shares that view. I think thereâs a lot of misinformation out there and fear mongering, but that just helps sell emergency food, NRA memberships, and home security systems.
Then our current policy of trying to resettle refugees here should go. Let the people who want to help organized a charity and let that charity pay to help resettle refugees somewhere. If the US canât vet them properly help settle them somewhere else or help them in their own country. Bottom line there are a majority of people in this country that donât want the government spending the tax dollars they took from them helping people from some other part of the world. Thatâs America First in a nutshell and Trump won by yelling it every chance he got. To quote Obama, âElections have consequencesâ.
Charities are already pretty heavily involved, but it still requires government involvement (background checks, etc). Thereâs also data to support that over the long term refugees (particularly those in America) lead to a net gain in economy, rather than being a long term drain on it. I disagree that the majority is opposed; Trump did lose the popular vote.
Thereâs a lot of people that donât think we should be spending as much as we are on the defense budget for boondoggles like the f-35 when thereâs a completely competent fleet of aircraft that can do the job better and cheaper.
You donât really get to pick and choose what your tax dollars are spent on any more than I do. We all have to compromise.
I think everyone is tired of that, but thatâs not what is happening in this case. People are seeking refuge here because of the conditions in their home countries. We arenât forcing them to come here or adopt our culture abroad.
@JayS ^
âmore than one million mostly male migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Few, if any, of the migrants were vetted before being allowed to enter Germany.â Emphasis added.
Howâs that relevant to the US refugee program?
But you kinda do get to choose, when you vote. In this election we voted in a president who ran on America First, and spending tax dollars on refugees doesnât fit that policy. Then we doubled down and gave him the house, senate and a bunch of governors too.
Also, for the last time, I donât give a damn about the popular vote because we donât elect a president based on popular vote. Claiming Hillary would have won is like having @LZ and @joelster build drag cars then when LZ loses in the 1/4 mile having him tell joelster his car is faster around a road course and thatâs what people care about so he should have won. They built their cars to drag race not run a road course so itâs irrelevant, just like Clinton and Trump built their campaigns around 270 electoral votes so popular vote is irrelevant. Would Clinton have won if they both ran a campaign chasing the popular vote instead of chasing 270 electoral votes? Who knows! They definitely would have been visiting different areas and spending money differently than they did though.
Fixed.
Stay within one category and the factors in that category.
^+1. The thing I donât get is this, how did the Islamic majority in the country come together with the Democratic party? Or is that just what is made out to be the case? Islam and Democrats and Liberals couldnât be further apart. Itâs easier to convince a Christian than a Muslim on issues of homosexuality etc. The only thing that makes sense is that the majority of the Muslim community could care less about what happens and do not have the same Patriotic feelings that traditional Americans do. If the Democrats are relying on them to feel beholden or like they owe something to the Democratic party, they are in for a surprise and some extreme pains. At their core, the great majority of Muslims would fit the far right profile.
We had some interesting conversations with some people in Lackawanna that my wife worked for a couple years ago. The only reason they supported Democrats was because it was more beneficial, whereas in terms of ideals, world view etc they were on different planets.
:tup:
Wait, so weâre trusting polls again?
Are we not doing phrasing anymore?
Keep your electoral panties on. That was just a response to your majority comment. âthere are a majority of people in this countryâ The electoral college is irrelevant in that context.
-
-
- Updated - - -
-
I agree, most Muslims I know are definitely more conservative.
Iâm not really sure that this is strictly a liberal/conservative issue. There are a number of conservatives involved in refugee programs, particularly Catholics and other Christians.