5
5
0
Posted 8 y ago
Responses: 12
The ban was designed to create a time delay to improve screening processes. POTUS then tweeted about giving Christians priority, and media ran with the 'Muslim' ban... but I really thought the legal opposition was mostly about denying people who are already approved, already screened green card holders. I read an article last week that an international student at a local university - a junior who's been there for three years- wasn't allowed to get back to class in the US after a trip back to see family. It was an unfortunate casualty in the dragnet.
So I could see a valid legal argument on most sides about if the ban should include pre-approved green card holders.... that would be a decent discussion...
But I was dead wrong- the opposition just wants to be opposition due to partisan ideals. The extreme left and extreme right hijacked the conversation. It's now 'let everyone in' or 'let no one in.' Both extremes are seriously flawed. Its.now about anti-Muslim vs tolerance of all religions.
So there I was directing the logical disagreements if what to do with the few who would unfairly get caught in the net that was cast in order to find progress in the name of better screening and a better path to legal immigration... there I was realizing I was a fool to try and look at the differences logically because it all comes down to blind partisan loyalties and blind hatred.
The left and right are really destroying most everything that would lead to progress.
So I could see a valid legal argument on most sides about if the ban should include pre-approved green card holders.... that would be a decent discussion...
But I was dead wrong- the opposition just wants to be opposition due to partisan ideals. The extreme left and extreme right hijacked the conversation. It's now 'let everyone in' or 'let no one in.' Both extremes are seriously flawed. Its.now about anti-Muslim vs tolerance of all religions.
So there I was directing the logical disagreements if what to do with the few who would unfairly get caught in the net that was cast in order to find progress in the name of better screening and a better path to legal immigration... there I was realizing I was a fool to try and look at the differences logically because it all comes down to blind partisan loyalties and blind hatred.
The left and right are really destroying most everything that would lead to progress.
(8)
(0)
SSG Michael Hartsfield
Damn.
That was...good. I must admit, that was well thought out and maddeningly accurate
That was...good. I must admit, that was well thought out and maddeningly accurate
(2)
(0)
LTC David Brown
I do believe congress granted that power to the President, and a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court ruled that the management of immigration was a political affair and not a legal affair.
(0)
(0)
The Constitution gives these rights to the President. These judges don't get security briefings. And the 9th circuit is the most overturned.
(7)
(0)
Courts are not supposed to create policy. Lawmakers that are elected do. Courts are supposed to uphold the laws made by said lawmakers. Nothing more, nothing less. The President has the right to do what he needs to do if it is deemed a detriment to the United States. I can remember when Sotomayor was up for the Supreme Court and she was on video saying Judges make policy. She was given a pass on that and was given a seat on the Court. We are losing our hold on our own country for the sake of the views of other countries and how foreigners view us. Tragic.
(4)
(0)
Read This Next