Indeed, if the White House suggested tonight that ending chain migration was a nonnegotiable component of immigration reform, Democrats made clear that it’s not a price they’re willing to pay—even for a path to citizenship for the “Dreamers.”
Why???? Why would they do that? There is literally no explanation other than that they want to keep the Dreamers in the current state of fear and uncertainty because they can be used for a multitude of purposes this way. As citizens, though, they serve no useful purpose and will probably vote for those who legalized them.
Also, Hillary is giving outlandishly tone-deaf and ridiculous explanations for why she didn’t fire yet another sexual harasser in her entourage. I have no idea why she thinks she needs to give any explanations at all. Retire, Hillary! It’s time. Let us who supported you remember you with fondness as somebody who fought but lost and not as somebody who was weirdly dedicated to justifying her reputation of a total hypocrite.
Clarissa's Blog 
Indeed, if the White House suggested tonight that ending
chain migration<a href=”https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_reunification#In_the_United_States”>family reunification was a nonnegotiable component of immigration reform, Democrats made clear that it’s not a price they’re willing to pay—even for a path to citizenship for the “Dreamers.”It’s very unpopular with green card holders or citizens trying to sponsor their relatives. :p
LikeLike
And persecuting Dreamers is unpopular with most of the country. So why not choose the majority?
As for chain immigration, my position is that one has to be consistent. If you embrace fluidity and become an immigrant, then you’ve got to embrace the consequences. And those consequences mean that extended families are gone in the fluid era.
LikeLike
And persecuting Dreamers is unpopular with most of the country
Really?
Wouldn’t the DREAM Act be law already instead of this absurd fight over DACA, which as is, is caca?
As for
chain immigration, my position is that one has to be consistent. If you embrace fluidity and become an immigrant, then you’ve got to embrace the consequences. And those consequences mean that extended families are gone in the fluid era.If you’re an adult when you immigrate that is a fine and sensible thing to say if you embrace fluidity you accept the consequences.
My extended family is “gone” because of choices other people, mainly my parents, made before I was born. Even if I had stayed in the town I grew up in, I would still have extended family all over the country and the world, had grandparents over 10,000 miles away, etc.
Can you say the army brat has “embraced fluidity” by virtue of his/her parents moving everywhere?
Actually, what do you think of as “embracing fluidity” besides immigrating?
LikeLike
“Actually, what do you think of as “embracing fluidity” besides immigrating?”
“If you’re an adult when you immigrate that is a fine and sensible thing to say if you embrace fluidity you accept the consequences.”
LikeLike
He’s giving them what they want. I don’t understand their intransigence.
“It’s time.”
Heh.
LikeLike
I don’t get it either. But the base agrees most passionately that the Democrats shouldn’t agree to this deal. Which makes me have unpleasant feelings about the base.
LikeLike
I think Democrats are becoming the de facto open borders party.
I think they’re over-estimating how popular the idea is with the general public.
LikeLike
They are very clearly and openly trying to create and bloat a permanent class of second-class inhabitants who have no rights, live in constant fear, and can be exploited as much as possible.
Gosh, if even Trump begins to sound more reasonable than you on an issue, it’s time to rethink the whole approach.
LikeLike