I am 100% for immigration reform as part of an overall umbrella to curtail America’s over population crisis and to keep our 50 states safe…in the rare examples where terrorists come from abroad. The sad fact of the matter is most of our terrorists are from right here inside the US and they are most often right wingers!
As for over population: 322,000,000 Americans is way too many - NOT SUSTAINABLE - period!
Our land can sustain approximately 175,000,000 people…sadly the baby boomer generation has been completely wrong to brainwash into thinking growth is the path to prosperity. That is hog wash! Growth when we are over populated is the path to extinction…for our country and our species.
Republicans as usual are doing the opposite to what needs to happen:
- We need women to be in charge of their bodies and they understand what it means to raise a child for 18 to 20 years! Men are block heads.
- Women are already forced to have unplanned children in the US…those numbers are higher than the annual illegal immigration numbers as well. So do NOT think immigration is the way to control and gradually reduce our population back to 175 million (1970’s level).
- Healthcare and available birth control is needed for all women - PERIOD!
- Family planning and education is a must…it must be a top priority. Educated women will always make the right decision on family issues!
- Our tax policies and other government policies need to stop incentivizing large families. We should be taxing more for having more than 2 children…not giving them tax breaks. It costs the family and the community and the nation to support children…it’s time we pay for having children that rely on public services such as highways and schools and etc…
- The nation needs a 2 child policy - for all couples!
Do we go full Chinese? Do the girls go out with the garbage?
If we have too many people, I think we should just kill everyone in Oklahoma. It’s a start. And it would be easier than convincing people they have to educate their kids about birth control.
Is there any chance the Supreme Court reverses course on lifting these restrictions? They said “bona fide relationship” and the WH promptly interpreted that to mean immediate family. Usually judges get pretty annoyed when litigants willfully misrepresent their decisions, which would definitely seem to be the case here. A grandparent isn’t a “bona fide relationship”? A fiance isn’t a “bona fide relationship”? If you’re a parts supplier or materials supplier for my business, you and I don’t have a “bona fide relationship”? Sheesh, if I just want to go on vacation and come visit you and hang out as friends, we don’t have a “bona fide relationship”?
The House of Saud gets a pass, because Good Muslims with oil that don’t hate on Donaldo.
Singling out nations is preposterous and for show only. The basis of fighting terrorism fails and the basis of pinning terrorism on Muslims only also fails.
I personally can not see what prompted the SC to even give this a partial reinstatement. Did they feel sorry for loser Boy Don?
This is a wild swing, a finding a needle in a haystack attempt at security.
I expect one of two things: either State and Homeland security will basically allow whatever relationships people claim, which would be good and mostly make the new regs meaningless, or else they’ll go full-scale arbitrary and capricious. And deny whoever they please by claiming that the relationships are only for purposes of evading the rules.
Even this stuff is evil. Last fall I visited germany. It was the first time I’d seen my cousins in 20 years. Except they’re not exactly cousins – for one group, their grandfather’s uncle or cousin (can’t remember which offhand) was married to my grandfather’s sister), for the other, their grandmother was related to someone who married a sibling of my grandmother. We all known each other for 50 years or so, but that would never qualify under any kind of enumerated rule.
I’m sorry, but all I heard was “the browns are out-reproducing us and we gotta make it stop!!!”