No doubt you would prefer that as it resulted in the country drifting to the left. We need to stand firm if we are going to take our country back. We learned from the mistakes in the past and I prefer the current approach. Winner take all, no more participation awards. 

We need to stand firm if we are going to take our country back.

Let me guess, you complained that the dems were dividing the country too? Yep. 

William Buckley said in 1955: 

A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.

Today, those who call themselves conservatives, and especially the Trump sycophants, yell Stop and GO BACK. The insist that we revert to a 'Father Knows Best' time that is long gone. 

I can remember watching Buckley on Firing Line and respect his mind though not his beliefs, especially his thoughts on HIV/AIDS. 

And you demonstrate the left side of the problem.  This site is a microcosm of the overall political world in the U.S.  You cannot simply listen to someone who has an opinion different than yours, becuase you have your fingers in your ears shouting, we are right because we are on the left.  The problem is, that you assume that everyone and everything on the left is the same message as President Trump, which reflects shallow, one dimensional thinking on the part of the left.

Have you noticed that Republicans are not in lock step with the President?   And yet, folks on the left continue to, wrongly, lump everyone together as having one message.

And you demonstrate the left side of the problem. This site is a microcosm of the overall political world in the U.S. You cannot simply listen to someone who has an opinion different than yours, becuase you have your fingers in your ears shouting, we are right because we are on the left.

I find it interesting that you immediately go for a personal comment. 

I'm pretty sure that there are a couple of conservative here that WISH I didn't READ their comments very carefully. They would get away with a whole lot more BS around here. 

The problem is, that you assume that everyone and everything on the left is the same message as President Trump, which reflects shallow, one dimensional thinking on the part of the left.

Could you state that cogently please? 

Have you noticed that Republicans are not in lock step with the President? 

Why yes, YES I have. I have quite a few friends who are Reagan Republicans. Some voted for Trump, some didn't. I also have a couple of hard core Trump sycophants in my family. Though I post decidedly liberal stuff on my Facebook feed and they tout Trump, we haven't unfriended each other, we agree to disagree. In fact, I'm going up to Wisconsin in a month to visit them and see their new horses. 

And yet, folks on the left continue to, wrongly, lump everyone together as having one message.

I note that you just lumped 'folks on the left' as having one message. 

Buckley is timeless. Even when I disagreed with him, I could see the validity in his points, since he took the time to think them out.. instead of leading with his mouth. 

Politics aside, well written words are a casualty of the times and we are all the worse for their passing. 

There are exceptions:

unionleader

We can mourn the passing of Mr.Krauthammer as well.

Thank you for giving me a venue for a Krauthammer meme I have been saving.

Pretty tough to be civil today when you have a POTUS that literally attacks everyone he doesn't agree with...which is pretty much everyone. 

Example: Harley Davidson. They were all for trump, but after the tariffs, and realizing that they would lose 100 MILLION a year as a result, they are moving their production to Europe and trump immediately attacked them for it. Civil? Nope. 

Example: Harley Davidson.

Not an example.

snopes

CLAIM

Harley-Davidson announced in March 2018 that they were closing a Wisconsin plant and moving all manufacturing to Thailand in response to President Donald Trump's just-announced steel tariffs.

RATING

  MOSTLY FALSE

WHAT'S TRUE

Harley-Davidson has announced the closure of at least one of their U.S. factories and also announced that they would be opening a manufacturing plant in Thailand.

WHAT'S FALSE

These decisions were both made before President Trump imposed tariffs on imported steel, and Harley-Davidson did not shut down their Wisconsin plant nor stop building motorcycles in the United States.

ORIGIN

Motorcycle manufacturer Harley-Davidson could face new challenges in the wake of President Donald Trump’s sudden decision to impose   tariffs   on steel and aluminum in March 2018.

This Facebook post is largely based on a 9 March 2018 MSNBC   segment  that featured reporter Garrett Haake speaking with employees at a Harley Davidson plant in Kansas City, Missouri. Some viewers, including the above Facebook poster, may have been confused by the segment, as it did not clearly state that Harley-Davidson first announced that this plant would be closing in January 2018 — more than a month before Trump made his tariff decision.

It is true that some American companies have expressed concern about how new tariffs may affect their business going forward. It is also true that Harley-Davidson will soon be closing a plant in Kansas City, Missouri.

However, these items are not directly related. In fact, Harley has planned on consolidating production at the Kansas City plant since  2015 ,  before Trump was even in office; when the company made the announcement, it said that it was due to slowing  motorcycle sales :

Harley-Davidson’s sales fell sharply in 2017 and the company will move ahead with a plan to consolidate manufacturing operations, including the closure of its Kansas City, Mo. plant.

The world’s largest maker of heavyweight motorcycles has struggled to reverse a four-year sales slide, with growth overseas somewhat helping offset a decline in the U.S. bike market.

Additionally, Harley-Davidson  announced   in 2017 that it would be opening a manufacturing plant in Thailand. However, Harley said at the time that the decision was made to better serve the burgeoning market in southeast Asia, and that the decision would not affect manufacturing in the United States:

The Thailand facility “will allow us to be more responsive and competitive in the ASEAN region and China,” Harley-Davidson public relations manager Katie Whitmore said.

“Increased access and affordability for our customers in the region is key to growth for the company in total,” she said. “There is no intent to reduce H-D U.S. manufacturing due to this expansion.”

The plant would let Milwaukee-based Harley-Davidson avoid Thailand’s up to 60 percent tariff on imported motorcycles and help it get tax breaks when exporting to Thailand’s neighbors, thanks to a trade arrangement among members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nation (ASEAN).

Harley opened a plant in India in 2011. It also assembles motorcycles at a plant in Brazil.

The company released a   statement   in March 2018 saying that these tariffs, as well as tariffs imposed in retaliation by the European Union, could directly hurt their business:

“We support free and fair trade,” the company said in a statement. “Import tariffs on steel and aluminum will drive up costs for all products made with these raw materials, regardless of their origin. Additionally, a punitive, retaliatory tariff on Harley-Davidson motorcycles in any market would have a significant impact on our sales, our dealers, their suppliers and our customers in those markets.”

But you used Snopes...the conservatives won't believe you

the conservatives won't believe you

Neither will the centrists, liberals, libertarians, etc. if it doesn't fit their political agenda of smearing their opponents with innuendo, propaganda and outrageous lies.

I believe you because I think Snopes does a very good job at debunking things

if it doesn't fit their political agenda

theconversation

When news breaks – whether the story of a disease outbreak, a terrorist attack or a natural disaster – people increasingly turn to the internet and social media. Individuals use   Twitter and Facebook as primary sources for news and information. Social media platforms – including Reddit, Wikipedia and other emerging outlets such as Snapchat – are distinct from traditional broadcast and print media. But they’ve become powerful tools for communicating rapidly and without intermediary gatekeepers, like editors.

The problem is that social media is also a great way to spread misinformation, too. Millions of Americans shape their ideas on complex and controversial scientific questions – things like personal genetic testing, genetically modified foods and their use of antibiotics – based on what they see on social media. Even many traditional   news organizations and media outlets   report incomplete aspects of scientific studies, or misinterpret the findings and highlight unusual claims. Once these items enter into the social media echo chamber, they’re amplified. The   facts become lost in the shuffle   of competing information, limited attention or both.

A recent workshop about   Social Media Effects on Scientific Controversies that we convened through the   Center for Mobile Communication Studies   at Boston University fielded a panel of interdisciplinary experts to discuss their own experiences and research in communicating science online. These public scholars examined the extent to which social media has disrupted scientific understanding. Most indicated it’s more possible than ever for researchers to participate meaningfully in public debates and contribute to the creation and diffusion of scientific knowledge – but social media presents many pitfalls along the way.

Post a lot, know a lot?

Our team from the Emerging Media Studies division at Boston University presented new findings that indicate social media can perpetuate misinformation about antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and may contribute indirectly to the misuse of antibiotics.

In a nationwide survey, we found that the more frequently respondents reported posting and sharing any information online to social media, they were increasingly likely to be highly misinformed about AMR. This suggests that those individuals most active in contributing to social media were actually propagating inaccurate information. Our finding follows previous studies of   online rumors : people are more likely to believe political rumors and share them with others when they’re received via email from friends or family.

We also found traditional media use – watching television, listening to talk radio, reading newspapers – was also related to higher levels of AMR misinformation. When taken together, our findings suggest there may be a misinformation cycle taking shape. Traditional media exposure, it seems, can be a source of AMR misinformation. Increased posting of content to social media reinforces misinformation, and in our study those higher levels of AMR misinformation are shown to increase the likelihood that individuals will   misuse antibiotics . Eventually, such misuse increases antimicrobial resistance, which makes it   harder for us to treat illnesses   and   may give rise to superbugs .

“Scienceploitation” on social media

Another panelist was University of Alberta law and public health professor   Tim Caulfield , who actively works to diminish the phenomenon he calls “scienceploitation.” He defines the term as when media reporting takes a legitimate area of science and inaccurately simplifies it for the general public.

Scienceploitation is embodied in especially egregious “click-bait” headlines. Think the Huffington Post   erroneously   equating a glass of red wine to an hour at the gym, or the viral   hoax study   that linked eating chocolate with losing weight.

Caulfield himself studies how   stem cell clinics market unproven therapies   for serious diseases and the way widespread acceptance of these treatments often goes virtually unchallenged on social media. For example, he analyzed   Twitter users’ reactions   to the (now deceased) former professional hockey player Gordie Howe receiving stem cell treatments in Mexico after a stroke.

A vast majority (78.8 percent) of tweets on the topic mentioned improvements to Howe’s health. By contrast, only a single tweet explicitly mentioned that Howe’s stem cell treatment was unproven. Just three tweets out of 2,783 warned that direct-to-consumer stem cell treatments lack the robust body of scientific evidence required for FDA approval.

Caulfield’s work has illustrated how   social media can be a vehicle for hype   that creates insular bubbles of information and online echo chambers. In these spaces, ideas and misinformation can readily be reinforced because of the lack of diverse viewpoints and critiquing of ideas.

I think Snopes does a very good job at debunking things

Me, too.  But I did not rely just on Snopes for that information.  I usually check out several sources before I post anything.  In this case, I just debunked the Harley Davidson propaganda yesterday using a different source.  

The reality is that Harley sales have tanked the same as other motorcycle manufacturers.  The motorcycle enthusiasts have largely aged out of the market into wheelchairs, nursing homes, etc.  

The world's population is moving to cities where there is public transportation, horrendous traffic, limited parking available and probably a host of other reasons why vehicle ownership is best to be avoided if possible.

Let's look at trends in the US.  The article is from 2016, but I am just almost kinda sorta positive that Donald Trump is to blame.  LOL!

latimes

Many also are alarmed by a trend occurring among the youngest millennials: Only about 60% of today's 18-year-olds have a driver's license, compared with 80% in the 1980s, according to a study from the University of Michigan.

There's also a shift in how millennials perceive cars in general. Gone are the days when owning a car, the ultimate status symbol, meant freedom and maturity. For this generation, automobiles have become less of an aspirational purchase and more of a utilitarian one.

I don't know what millenials they're surveying but the ones where I live can't wait to get a car.

But I would think that people who live in cities might want to buy things like scooters which are easy to store and manuever. Also, I think they may have surveyed people who live in larger cities like LA, NY or Chicago because you need some kind of transportation if you live in Little Rock. Southern cities are slow to move away from the car culture

Southern cities are slow to move away from the car culture

Definitely.  In rural areas, personal transportation is a necessity.  However, my husband's twin grandsons were forced by their mother to get a driver's license when they were almost 18.   One of them did 4 years in the Marine Corps and returned home to sit on the couch.  The other one has never left home or held a job as far as I know.  

I will note that my husband and I would have likely been killed in a head on collision Monday afternoon if I hadn't been lucky enough to have enough shoulder to drive on when an old Chevy Suburban came around a curve in my lane.

We need a return to the days when the left and right could sit down and craft policies that may not satisfy everyone but is good for all.

That would require us to agree to agree on facts. We now live in a nation were facts no longer matter, where 'alternative facts' are accepted part of the narrative. IMHO, it is impossible to craft policies when we can't agree on the facts behind the issues. 

Our 'leaders' lie to us night and day for their own personal aggrandizement and desperate desire to keep the power they yield. It's gotten exponentially worse in the era of Trump. When some one like Corker, who not that long ago was a GOP hero, walk away in disgust, we're in trouble. I felt it coming when the GOP primaried Sen. Lugar with a right wing bible thumping nut case, who WON. 

Thank you for making an attempt to bridge the political parties.  I wish I could adopt your optimism or care enough to make a similar attempt.  I believe the country needs to be destroyed.  We've had a pretty good run and now it is time for the USA to fall. 

That’s really sad.  Who would you prefer to occupy us?  

Who would you prefer to occupy us?

Lol no one, just turn it into a radioactive, polluted, uninhabitable land from coast to coast (just kidding I hope for nothing of the sort) 

ya see doc... the days you are talking about? looked like this

when the left gets back there....  we can talk.. 

until then? no compromises will be available.

..

when the left gets back there.... we can talk. until then? no compromises will be available.

Well hell, that means we can talk right now.

The 'left' has no issue with 'strengthening the border' and it's been the GOP who refused to MANDATE e-verify and put TEETH into prosecuting employers that hire 'illegals'. 

Well hell, that means we can talk right now.

bs.

bbc

illegals and dreamers are just a political football for todays left.

in other words.

I get caught accepting y'all at your word all the time. My bad. 

then try reading all the words in the context written or implied

  I was talking about the dems who can actually sign laws ( not you )

me and you talking about this subject changes nothing at the border or in DC 

if you thought I meant me and you should talk?    LOL  too damn funny.

but perhaps I was not clear enough.

try this:

when maxine and pelosi talk like clinton did in the video? and pelsi stops supporting ms13? 

  that's when "politicians can talk across the aisle.

cheers

 I was talking about the dems who can actually sign laws ( not you )

So you want to talk about someone that DOES NOT EXIST on the Federal level? 

me and you talking about this subject changes nothing at the border or in DC

Is that your standard for participating in a discussion here on NT? 

if you thought I meant me and you should talk? LOL too damn funny.

You said 'we' and presuming that meant NT members can hardly be considered a stretch. 

but perhaps I was not clear enough.
try this:
when maxine and pelosi talk like clinton did in the video?  
that's when "politicians can talk across the aisle.

How about Trump, Ryan, Scalise, McConnell and Gohmert? How do you want them to talk?

 and pelsi stops supporting ms13?

That can't be taken seriously by any thinking person. Try harder. 

cheers

and it's been the GOP who refused to MANDATE e-verify

that is another basket of fish...

the GOP and DEMS  have both been selling out this country for about 60yrs

each playing their part right on que.

if one has been watching long enough they have seen without doubt every president continue the policy of the last president REGARDLESS of campaign promises to do otherwise

and then we elected trump/ he is putting that 60yrs of BS from both parties far behind us.

it will take more than one election to drain the swamp of critters left and right but in the end, the only ones on either side left standing will be the one who put our country first and keep their promise to do so after they get elected.

 inside the next decade...

GOP will flush the never trumpers / globalists

DNC will flush the progressives / globalists

why? we took our country back and we will be keeping it.

this is what taking our country back looks like... perhaps messy.. but highly effective and better than a military coup any day of the week

cheers:)

that is another basket of fish...

have both been selling out this country for about 60yrs

The 2013 “Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act” passed with 16 GOP Senate votes. The bill funded costs for an E-verify MANDATE within 5 years.

Doing the math, that would be NOW. 

The Speaker of the House, John Boehner REFUSED to bring the bill to the floor for a vote AND failed to submit a House version of the bill. In fact NO action on immigration of any kind happened in the 2013 House whatsoever. In short, the House GOP didn't even TRY. 

So the blame for the failure to pass Immigration reform in 2013 is squarely on the Speakers shoulders, just as it is today, for totally different reasons. 

A couple of great commentaries on the current issue of civility:

esquire

twitter

It is rare that real change and progress ever comes without episodes of "incivility". More often than not, it requires true moral outrage over the lives of people or oppression or poverty.

Whether it was the creating of America leaving the oppression of England, the fight against slavery and the Civil War, the fight for equality and the right to vote for women and the suffragettes, the fight for equality for blacks to attend school, ride a bus, or eat at a lunch counter.

The fight against the Vietnam War, the sexual revolution, the fight for equal pay regardless of gender, the fight for equality for women to choose, the fight for our Voting Rights, nothing ever comes about without some events calling attention to the dire plight of others.

The biggest march in history was the Womens March after Trump was elected and there is a rising up of the people the same way we saw in all the struggles of the past.

We cannot allow a minority of white voters who only vote GOP to turn back the clock on all the hard won progress of the last hundred years. Trump did not actually win, he actually lost by 3 million votes and the POPULAR vote actually counts even if he is constantly lying about it.

The American people did not want Trump, and they are telling everyone now loud an clear they were not heard at the polls and the outrageous destruction of American equality and fairness is being destroyed by a man who wants to be king.

America would be better off with a benevolent king instead of a malevolent king wannabe.

We cannot allow a minority of white voters who only vote GOP to turn back the clock on all the hard won progress of the last hundred years.

In the short term they might cause some damage, but in the long run those bigoted white conservatives will always lose.

What is currently happening is that we have politicians who have come to realize that the extreme on each side will form an unmovable base as long as the position of the candidate is as extreme as they are. We are therefore seeing the proliferation of extreme candidates on both the right and the left. What is missing from our dialogue is the view of those in the middle. We act as if the nation has only red meat conservatives and left wing liberals. That is because it is all we see and hear. That middle is still out there and probably still is the single largest voting bloc. In 2016, they moved right, for whatever reason. The result was President Trump and a republican victory across the board. They may move in the opposite direction in 2018 or 2020. The pendulum swings. The locations of power shift. We might see this upcoming battlefield fought in the suburbs of this company. No matter how far right we might be now, there will be a time where we move back to the left. There will be a time where civility "trumps" incivility.

Nobody takes back the country permanently, they just lease it for a limited period of time.

The pendulum does swing both ways but in the long run the base of the pendulum shifts to the left across the table as society evolves, otherwise southern conservative whites would still own black slaves and the entire country would still have coverture laws and permit marital rape.

Civility in politics  is important, but even this thread a paen to civility is  full of straw men and insults. I'm all for civility yin politics, but it's never really existed.  

What is a problem is when it carries over into everyday life. When restaurateur  declares jihad on  a customer eating privately with her family  and follows her family  around the street organizing protests against her very presence because of her politics we've gone too far. Civil society requires a line a between the public and private and when that line is obliterated, violence results. Democrats and Republicans need to be be able to interact and converse about all those little things that make up our lives without it being about what "team" you are on. Our country, any functioning democracy, requires that. 

Round of applause for that comment.  That's how governing is done....via talking and compromise.  Both sides should consider the middle before opening their mouths.

I'm all for civility yin politics, but it's never really existed.

Translation: I am all for civility in politics but am incapable of participating. 

Translation: I am all for civility in politics but am incapable of participating.

You should read a history book. It might help you keep up. 

You should read a history book. It might help you keep up.

I've already put my knowledge of history up against yours with quite a bit of success.. If you'd like to revisit that or any other debate on the issue, please proceed.

Son, if you think American politics haven't been marked by incivility historically, I [deleted]

Son, if you think American politics haven't been marked by incivility historically, I'd be surprised if you graduated high school.

First of all, I am NOT your son. Use my NT name when addressing me. 

Secondly, I have not pursued the position that 'politics haven't been marked by incivility historically', refrain from insinuating that I have. 

Whatever you need instruction on, I'm here to help.

Judging from our prior discussions, there is no evidence to support your claim. 

On this topic, I'd recommend starting with the infighting within the Washington administration. I can recommend some pop history that covers it pretty well if that would help.

I recommend the Federalist papers. Reading them in their entirely, should make it obvious what was predicted by the founders. What wasn't predicted was the wholesale abdication of Constitutional obligations by elected officials and the acquiescence to mediocracy that exists today. 

Nor did they foresee that the system they devised could be so flawed:

avalon.law.yale

The process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States. 

What Hamilton insisted was a 'moral certainty' has been utterly undermined. 

What wasn't predicted was the wholesale abdication of Constitutional obligations by elected officials and the acquiescence to mediocracy that exists today.

Very true and it's a real problem.

It's the era of clickbait.  You can't get someone to go to an article without a ridiculous headline.... and now politicians rule their bases up with ridiculous claims like "THEY ARE NAZIS/COMMUNISTS"....  when you say extreme things to get the votes it polarizes the sides to the same extreme. 

We treat compromise like it's a dirty whore

We treat compromise like it's a dirty whore

What compromises do you have in mind?  I am really interested.

Now I have to think.

I think we can compromise on health care in this country. I think we can find a compromise on some form of universal health care along with actual health care price reform. Universal health care coverage is no good without price controls.

Tax reform. Real tax reform. Throw the working class something besides a bone. Start with the cap on social security taxation. Get rid of it.

I should have asked you to start first since you are way more informed than I am.

You're doing great. 

Those are definitely two great examples of things that our elected representatives needs to work on for the benefit of the citizens of the US.

There are other things where there is no compromise like equal rights and separation of church and state.

The US just ranked 10th in a ranking of the 10 Most Dangerous Countries in the World for Women because of the ongoing tradition of abusing women in the US that has been in place long before I was born in the 1950s.

haaretz

10 Most Dangerous Countries in the World for Women

Here is the list of the 10 countries ranked as the most dangerous for women by a survey of global experts

The Thomson Reuters Foundation survey of about 550 experts on women's issues ranked war-torn Afghanistan and  Syria  in second and third place, with Somalia and   Saudi Arabia   next.

It asked which five of the 193 United Nations member states were most dangerous for women and the worst for healthcare, economic resources, traditional practices, sexual and non-sexual abuse, and human trafficking.

Here is the list of the 10 countries ranked as the most dangerous for women by the survey, conducted between March 26 and May 4:

10. UNITED STATES - The only Western nation in the top 10 and joint third with Syria for the risks women face in terms of sexual violence, including rape, sexual harassment, coercion into sex and a lack of access to justice in rape cases. The survey came after the #MeToo campaign went viral last year, with thousands of women using the social media movement to share stories of sexual harassment or abuse. 

You're doing great.

Thanks. That means a lot coming from you.

I think there is some compromise to be done on immigration reform but that's one I have to think on

I think there is some compromise to be done on immigration reform but that's one I have to think on

I have thought on it for years.

I am not in favor of another amnesty and chain migration has to end period. 

Employers should have to use E-verify.  Fines for employing people who are not authorized to work in the US should begin in the $10,000 range.

US citizens who want to help people in other countries should work to improve conditions in other countries.  There is nothing feasible about moving all of the world's impoverished people to the US.  Besides the fact that women are not necessarily safer in the US than they were in their home country unless they are from the Middle East.

I do think something needs to be done for those people who came to the US as young children and know no other life. I wouldn't want to be deported to Germany after living here for 20 some years and I don't speak the language.

Don't tell anybody this, but I do agree with trump on a merit program and chain migration.

I am not in favor of another amnesty and chain migration has to end period.

Fines for employing people who are not authorized to work in the US should begin in the $10,000 range.

How about Tech firms, that hire a certain number of H1B visas, should have to set up and FUND STEM hubs to train US citizens and legal residents to fill those jobs? H1B visas last 6 years, which should give them PLENTY of time to train up all the US employees they need. That is over a quarter of a million high paying jobs filled by Americans that are now filled with H1B visa holders. 

As for 'amnesty', I can't help but wonder how much MORE likely those who had a shot at citizenship would be to follow the law and invest in this country. 

who had a shot at citizenship

Immigrants do have more than a "shot" of citizenship when they apply and are allowed to immigrate legally.

The illegal immigrants have already shown that they are more interested in their own economic interests regardless of US immigration law.  I have sincere doubts that self-interest won't be the major consideration in the majority of their other decisions.

That is over a quarter of a million high paying jobs filled by Americans that are now filled with H1B visa holders.

Why was this allowed in the first place?

Who authorized it and who did it benefit?

I have read that H1B visa holders have been mistreated in the US by their tech employers.  

I have worked for tyrants who seemed frustrated that there were laws and rules on how employees should be treated in the US.  I can only imagine how happy they would have been if they had had minions who would put up with abuse rather than risk being deporting.

Immigrants do have more than a "shot" of citizenship when they apply and are allowed to immigrate legally.

I was in grade school in the mid 60's when my grandfather was FINALLY naturalized, even though he had been here since 1937 and married to an American citizen with 4 American children.

Making people that have lived and working here for decades without breaking the law LEAVE and apply from 'their' country is ridiculous. 

The illegal immigrants have already shown that they are more interested in their own economic interests regardless of US immigration law. 

Your reply is interesting because I didn't say anything about 'economic interests'. 

I have sincere doubts that self-interest won't be the major consideration in the majority of their other decisions.

That's my point, following the law and investing in THIS country WOULD be in their self interest with citizenship as motivation. 

That's my point, following the law and investing in THIS country WOULD be in their self interest with citizenship as motivation.

The majority of illegal immigrants come to the US for their own economic reasons.

Are you in favor of enforcing immigration laws or open borders or catch and release or amnesty after amnesty or continuing to allow millions of illegal immigrants to remain living illegally in the US?

Why was this allowed in the first place? Who authorized it and who did it benefit?

The Congress.

I have read that H1B visa holders have been mistreated in the US by their tech employers.

I have known quite a few H1B holders from my time in Silicone Valley. They are basically indentured servants. They are STUCK working for their 'sponsor' for all 6 years unless they can find another employer to sponsor them. It's kind of an understood thing with H1B employers that you don't 'recruit' someone else's H1B employee. 

One guy I knew in Chicago was working 14-16 hour days doing data entry on salary. He had 2 kids that he never saw. He was TERRIFIED to say anything about it. I would sneak him in ice cream just to see him smile [no food in the computer room]. Supper nice guy, smart as hell, meek as hell. 

They are basically indentured servants.

Which should not be allowed to happen.

However, this is the program that "Congress" passed.  I bet Congressional campaigns received large donations from their corporate sponsors who were given indentured servants to exploit.

Are you in favor of enforcing immigration laws or open borders or catch and release or amnesty after amnesty or continuing to allow millions of illegal immigrants to remain living illegally in the US?

Crossing the border is a CIVIL misdemeanor that comes with a fine of $50-250.

If it makes you feel better, give them a ticket, fine them and make them do community service.

I'm talking about the kinds of families that brought in the Dreamers. The VAST majority have been productive members of their community. Dreamers go through a vetting system that is extremely rigorous. In short, the parents aren't criminals and they brought up GOOD KIDS who aren't criminals either. 

As long as employers get away with hiring illegal workers they will keep hiring them and the illegals will keep coming. That is a fact that we all accept. The GOP and their corporate funders will NEVER let legislation pass the MANDATES E-verify. NEVER. The greed is too deep.  

There was just a big bust in Ohio and a Landscape/Garden Center had over 100 employees that were undocumented. There is NO WAY IN HELL that they 'had no idea' their employees were undocumented. That is the BIG lie that they ALL get away with.

I've worked in the field for over 20 years and have NEVER worked for an employer that didn't KNOWINGLY hire illegals. Invariably the illegal employees are hard working, uncomplaining, underpaid and overworked. If they get hurt, they get cut loose. All the savings goes to the owners profit margin and saves every one of us $ at the grocery store. 

If it makes you feel better, give them a ticket, fine them and make them do community service.

so open borders?

so open borders?

Really? THAT's what you got from my post? I guess it proves that civility is going to be hard to come by. 

so open borders?

I don't know anyone who advocates for truly "open boarders" but it does seem that we put a whole lot of focus on the few thousand poor and disadvantaged refugees we see on our southern boarder while mostly not paying hardly any attention to the millions who just fly into the US and then overstay their visas with a little help from a lawyer and a real estate agent. You hardly hear English spoken in the ritzy neighborhoods around Central Park anymore. Mostly it is Russian or some Arabic language with a growing amount of Chinese. Millions of people come and go from the US every day but they are not poor and they did not have to walk 2,000 miles to get here. Should it be hard for Canadians to get into the US? Mexicans? Should it be harder than Russians or Chinese? The reason we are being awful to refugees from our south is because they are poor. Why shouldn't they be allowed across our boarder any more than everyone else here who flies into an airport? Could it be greed, avarice and maybe race? If so then we are not the America I grew up in and believed in. We welcomed all those fleeing tyranny in search of freedom not just those who could afford to come here loaded down with numbers on a computer screen that mean nothing...

Mostly it is Russian or some Arabic language with a growing amount of Chinese.

I suggest that everyone look into how many 'refugees' have been granted entry into the US.

Chinese refugees are #1.

I don't know anyone who advocates for truly "open boarders"

I don't know anyone who openly advocates for truly "open boarders" except those who are having hissy fits because we don't have truly "open boarders".

who just fly into the US and then overstay their visas

Are less than 5 percent of illegal immigrants according to Pew Research.  Although the article does go into detail about difficult it is to track citizens from our border countries because DHS does not require entry visas over the land borders.

some info...

pewresearch

Out of 45 million U.S. arrivals by air and sea whose tourist or business visas expired in fiscal 2015, the agency estimates that about 416,500 people were still in the country this year.

Data on those who overstay also could add detail to the portrait of the nation’s   11.3 million unauthorized immigrants , because it is not known how many arrived legally versus illegally.

The country profile of foreign visitors who overstay and became unauthorized is somewhat different from that of unauthorized immigrants overall.

Mexicans made up   49% of unauthorized immigrants   in 2014 (including some who arrived decades ago), but according to the report, they account for only about 9% of foreigners (or 42,000 people) who arrived by air and sea, overstayed and had not left by the end of fiscal 2015.

Canadians, meanwhile, account for about 1% of unauthorized immigrants in Pew Research Center’s latest estimate for 2012, but 19% of overstayers who had not departed by the end of fiscal 2015, or 93,000 people.

The report indicates that the number of foreign visitors who overstay dwindles over time. In all, the report said that out of the 45 million arrivals who were supposed to depart in fiscal 2015, about 527,000 remained in the country after their permission to stay expired, a rate of 1.17%. Some of these overstays later departed, but 483,000 were still in the U.S. at the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30, a rate of 1.07%. More left the U.S. after that, so by Jan. 4, 2016, an estimated 416,500 were still in the country, a rate of 0.9%. The DHS report said some have likely left since then, or obtained or renewed a legal visa.

Some interesting facts about ICE arrests from 2009 thru 2017.  

The criminal convictions are listed in the report.  

pewresearch

Immigrants with past criminal convictions accounted for 74% of all arrests made by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents in fiscal 2017, according to  data from the agency . The remainder were classified as “non-criminal” arrestees, including 16% with pending criminal charges and 11% with no known criminal convictions or charges.

The profile of arrestees by ICE’s Enforcement and Removal Operations has changed considerably in the past eight years: In fiscal 2009, the earliest year with comparable data, immigrants   without   past criminal convictions accounted for the majority (61%) of those arrested by the agency.

Overall, the number of ICE arrests decreased sharply during that span, from 297,898 in 2009 (the year President Barack Obama came into office) to 143,470 in 2017 (when President Donald Trump took office). However, last year’s total represented   a 30% increase   from the year before, with most of the increase coming after Trump   signed an executive order   to step up enforcement.

We welcomed all those fleeing tyranny in search of freedom not just those who could afford to come here loaded down with numbers on a computer screen that mean nothing...

"We" also tried to annihilate, in fact. "we" did almost annihilate the people who were living in this country before "we" arrived so we could "welcome" all those fleeing tyranny in search of freedom.

"We" are also great at overthrowing other country's leadership and installing corporate friendly puppets in the name of spreading democracy one bomb at a time.

If "we" are really concerned about helping other people then "we" should be practical and productive and do it by helping them in their own country because it is impossible to move them all to the US.

Just yesterday the GOP House voted on what they called a 'compromise' bill on immigration. The compromise was between the radical hard right and the hard right of the Republican Party. Not ONE Democrat had any input in the bill but in this day of Trump, THAT is considered a 'comprise'. 

a 'compromise' bill

That is the compromise. Democrats have NO real political power at this time.

Welcome to trumperika !

Not the kind of compromise I'm advocating for....

Were they offered a place in the discussion?  Did they come to the table?  Or did they pull a Schumer and flat out refuse before seeing anythng, much like he has said he will do with ANY Supreme Court Nominee?  How's that for 'compromise'?

The democrats idea of compromise is that they get everything they want in a bill and the GOP gives up everything they want in a bill .

Were they offered a place in the discussion?

NO. 

Did they come to the table?

They weren't invited. BOTH GOP bills were crafted behind closed doors. No committee hearings or reports, 0 Amendments and 1 whole hour of debate on the floor with 'House rules' waived. THAT is how the GOP runs the House. 

Or did they pull a Schumer and flat out refuse before seeing anything

It may behoove you to recognize that the Speaker of the House couldn't get HIS Majority caucus to pass EITHER of the bills that THEY wrote.

Blaming it on the Democrats is disingenuous at best. 

much like he has said he will do with ANY Supreme Court Nominee?

The SENATE hasn't VOTED on an Immigration bill. DO try to keep up. 

There is ONLY ONE bill that addresses Immigration as a whole that has filed in the Senate. It was filed by Sen. Feinstein and the Judiciary Committee hasn't held any hearings on it. Doubt that they will...

The GOP is however crafting their own Senate bill, AGAIN behind closed doors with NO Democratic input. I have NO doubt, should if ever come to fruition, McConnell will 'fill the tree' and no Amendments will be allowed. Care to bet on it? 

Listened to an MPR discussion this morning... Captivating America: Civility War that reminds me much of this one. Listen if ya get a chance; enjoyable is a point where the moderator had to step in fairly hard lol...he points out---" because the discussion was supposed to be about civility."

For me it comes down to relationships. Those close associations that truly allow for agreeable disagreement are at the crux of the issue. Husbands, wives, Families, neighborhoods,,,,civilizations, are all on a 24hr. speedy cruise passing each other in the night. Making and maintaining strong relationships will promote healthy discussion, spurring successful endeavors. 

Great article and thank you docphil.

:~)