Sorry American liberals but your stance on sanctuary cities is dumb

Okay, who are these foreign leaders saying US should have an open borders? Show your sources

 

It is, of course, a myth that we need (illegal) immigrants to harvest our food. Offer good pay and people will gladly do it.

 

I do agree that actuary cities are not good thing and the practice does encourage illegal alienism.

 

So the nation with the worst obesity problem in the world needs to put everyone at risk from illegals because we need more food?

 

Buy a freaking rifle or fishing pole and put your own meat or fish on the table.

Nothing worse than being a snowflake who's dependent on a grocery store and a deplorable truck driver who gets the food to the grocery stores.

There's already Temporary Agricultural Workers H-2A visas in place. And there's no cap on how many of these H-2A visas can be issued.

But the progressives will call these temporary non immigrant workers immigrants just like they refer to illegal aliens as immigrants.

 

If the Democrats had actually been for border security, it would have been a very different election. But they're too invested in their demographic replacement plan for political control. And in the long run, it's a good plan. Eventually states like North Carolina and Florida will be blue, and if Texas goes, it's over. All they need is to keep the border open, and have a constant flow of new people and anchor babies. Once they get their amnesty, it's all over.

That's why the Democrats have gone bonkers over the victory of the most socially liberal Republican President ever. In fact, on many issues, Trump could have been a Democrat. But that border thing throws a monkey wrench into everything. So borders isn't just a feel good issue that they "don't care that deeply for anyway." It's really the Democrats most important issue.

 

Total BS and something you made up. BTW they don't FEED us, they just work in a menial job, one that can replaced very easily.

 

Open borders is a key part of liberal orthodoxy. Democrats want to add as many dark skinned newcomers as possible.

 

Establishment Republicans are right with the Democrats on supporting amnesty. They want to keep the flow of illegals just as much as the Democrats, but for different reasons. It's a different story for the base; the rank and file.

 

I don't blame you. LOL

 

You guys should build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.

 

In no way shape or form is harboring criminals not a crime in itself. The mayors and members of the city council of those cities should be jailed!!!!!

 

Eh..

I know enough about Canadians. They're very strongly against illegal immigration but have no problem with mass legal immigration that will soon replace their native population.

Ever seen Canadian big rigs on our streets lately? You will have difficulty finding one where the driver isn't wearing a turban....

 

Be very careful that you are not parroting a simplistic understanding of what American liberals believe on immigration. One of the basic problems is that the term 'Sanctuary city' can be a bit of misnomer. Depending how the municipal ordinance is written, it can simply clarify a set of boundaries between the role city employees and police are expected to play by their own governing body, and the role the federal government wants them to play. It can really complicate and compromise efforts to enforce other laws and investigate urban crime, if 20% of your population refuses to cooperate in any activity that might get them in contact with a cop, or health or communicable disease statistician, or a children's protective services worker, etc because someone might ask questions about a roommate or a father, or a cousin. That fear you engender, by also being a snitch to the feds, is not something you can turn off when you are desperate to get a Hispanic witness to come forward on a homocide, or a statement from a Hispanic neighbor about a child being neglected or abused, or a chronic fire code violator or if you want to stop a flu epidemic from hitting the elderly throughout the city . Its not so much that cities want to protect illegal immigrants directly, but they don't feel its their job to do the gruntwork for the federal immigration, especially if it makes doing their own job much harder. There are times in city governance when 'legal status; just cannot be the highest priority of government officials on the ground floor of a major problem.

they don't all necessarily care what the feds do in their cities to enforce immigration laws, as much as they care what the feds want them to do in their cities. These are not the same questions.

 

These "Sanctuary Cities" need to be revised so they are not as deplorable as they come across as being. We need these Sanctuary Cities to exist until these immigrants attain citizenship from accommodations, and the pathway to naturalization simplified. This would be a more productive way of our resources, instead of simply building a wall.

 

Miami is the first to give up sanctuary city status. They do not want to lose federal funding.

 

Businesses don't care deeply about making American's do jobs they don't want to do (or pay more to bring in temporary part timers). So they don't waste time on the issue.

I see you point.



​

 

Trump used undocumented persons to build his casinos. It ain't the poor who emply illegal immigrants.