Trump Vows to End Birthright Citizenship

How exactly has an 18 year old "contributed to society?" And is 6 years an "extended period of time" in your mind?

It certainly invalidates it as a policy that MAKES SENSE! You have failed to answer my question. Between the 15 year old arrival in 2007 and the baby arrival pre-1981, who is more important to protect from deportation? What should the higher priority be?

Did you completely ignore what I said in the first line of my last reply? I'm faulting DACA legislation because it doesn't deal with the more SIGNIFICANT illegal immigrants! NOT "ALL" illegal immigrants as you are suggesting that I "seem" to have a problem with. And what is "govuse?"

 

You stop here?

 

How exactly has an 18 year old "contributed to society?" And is 6 years an "extended period of time" in your mind?

 

You seem to keep repeating the same criticism of the DACA legislation which is apparently that it doesn't go far enough.

 

Well do YOU think that it goes far enough?

 

It deals with the People defined as DACA candidates. Does it solve the issue of all the illegals who have been in America and have been productive law abiding citizens for years? The answer is of course not.

 

And so yet again I ask you, between the 15 year old arrival in 2007 and the baby arrival pre-1981, who is more important to protect from deportation? What should the higher priority be?

 

What difference does priority make? Why do you think that is relevent to the DACA issue? Is it your position that the DACA people should be deported?

 

Since when was priority something that government ignored?

Yes, if they cannot also be joined by ALL childhood arrivals. Whatever happened to equality? The whole matter is very complex and very hard to draw lines I will admit, but generally I am in favour of allowing childhood arrivals to stay, however "childhood arrival" may be defined, which is tricky to define. However, I think EVERYONE would accept that a one day old baby who arrived pre-1981 would be considered as a childhood arrival, but yet they're not protected. Once again, this is the FARCE of DACCA.

 

Nope sorry just because it doesn't protect everyone doesn't make DACA a farce. That is as silly as saying vaccines are a farce because they don't absolutly stop every single person from getting the disease. Or that seat belts are a farce because some people in accidents will still get killed even if wearing seat belts. Or we shouldn't have an immigration policy because some illegals will still get into the country.

 

How many times do I have to tell you that my point is NOT simply that it is a farce because it doesn't protect everyone, but because it doesn't protect the people who are the highest priority! You CONTINUE to deflect my question, which I actually let you off on when you last deflected before this time. Are you not able to answer?

Is there a way that you know of that vaccines and seat belts could be done better?

The immigration policy is fine because it is implemented in response to needs. DACA is not.

 

I see that you have reached the end of your ability to defend your position. You can't even say who the highest priority is. That is very telling.

 

No it sn't. Just because you somehow think having a list of priorities in dealing with immigration is important doesn't make it so. Nor does the validity of defending the DACA kids require somehow assigning them a priority. The way government works is you deal with what you can and kick the rest of the issues down the road. Apparently Trump's only issue is his wall while the Dems main issues are border security and freeing the DACA hostages.

 

And you think that the government could ONLY deal with the younger childhood arrivals, but not the older ones?

 

Actually the government doesn't seem capable of dealing with either group. Or to put it more succinctly the government doesn't seem capable, period.

 

Wouldn't you say though, that there is quite a difference between how they've dealt with the younger childhood arrivals and the older ones?

 

Nope. The government appears to have been equally incompetent in dealing with both.

 

Obama's government?

 

The Regan government, the Clinton government, the Bush government, the Obama government and now the Trump government. None of these has delt effectively with the issue of either future illegal immigration or the issue of illegal immigrants already in the US.

 

Obama giving them immunity from deportation wasn't effective on the issue of illegal immigrants already in the US? What more could he have done for them? Buy houses for them?