Judge Blocks Burien's Sanctuary Repeal Measure From Going to the Ballot

Comments

1
Well, European citizens had no say in the immigration influx that the EU forced on them and that's been working out really well for them. I mean if you ignore all the raping being committed by recent immigrants.
3
Many migrant people are fleeing because of wars for control of their lands and resources much of this is motivated by corporate greed and US interference.

This means elite corporate entities can encourage blaming migrants and not the real causes such as corporate capitalism. They get to profit from private prisons for migrant workers that are nothing more than concentration camps. One such example is the North West Detention Center on the Tacoma tide flats which the federal government funds. ICE kidnaps people off of the streets and holds them there indefinitely.
4
@1 go back to stormfront you nazi shithead
5
Another loss for the Trumpies and haters!
6
@4. Keep lowering that bar, one day it will be so low you're going to step right over it yourself. It already means less than it did 2 months ago.

@2&3The issue isn't rapes, it's whether you believe the US or any other country has the sovereign right to vet the people we allow to come here to our national benefit and to enforce our borders. Why do we have to accept other countries' citizens without our consent and to what degree do we owe them anything besides a bus or airplane ride back to where they came from?
Also, any rapes by an undocumented alien are more than would have happened had they not been here in the first place. Making them the worst kind of rape...the avoidable kind.
7
@6: It does seem like the debate has boiled down to one side believing that borders and national sovereignty are racist by default, and concepts which should no longer exist.

Well, only for certain nations, anyway.
9
@8. Only a racist would say it's race. Illegal aliens come in all different colors, nationalities, and races.
10
Careful lil smoky. I almost called you a nazi!
12
@9: the important thing about illegal alien diversity is that the color and race is not-white. no one's clamoring to toss all the fookin Irish that overstay their visas, but its the letter of the law for the browns. no compromise!

@7: you're imposing the binary opposition on this. some/many/most people just want some compassion injected, and a practical solution found (mass deportation of millions of people is not practical) for those here now.

more migrations are coming as ACC sharpens. 50K max/year isn't going to cut it. billions live in regions that will become uninhabitable.
13
@12. Yeah. They are clamoring. Anyone that's not supposed to be here, send them home or fix the process to include those who qualify fora shot at visa or renewal. That's the overwhelming sentiment on illegal immigration and only people obsessed with race as a great divider believe that if you don't want people who aren't supposed to be here gone you must be racist. That's just a ridiculously stupid argument. How would you legally enforce that idea? A skin color coded immigration enforcement mechanism? You're smarter than that Solomon.

Lil smoky, not so much
14
@muffy
D you enjoy trolling or are you paid? Because you certainly can't be this willfully ignorant.
16
@13. What is willfully ignorant about seeing immigration as an issue separate from skin color? People who immigrate here should make an offer of their qualifications, be they seeking to fill a job, pursue an education, or seek asylum. Those qualifications have nothing to do with race and race has nothing to do with acceptance of an offer. If it does, that's wrong, change it. But show me a law on immigration that bans a specific skin color or nationality. You can't, and you're being willfully ignorant if you think that people who process work, student visas, and refugee work visas have a skin color quota.

When you circumvent the entire immigration system and sneak into the country or allow your visa to expire and not renew, wtf is racist about making you leave?

And @14. This might be a little hard for you to process, but doing the right thing and having the wrong people like it doesn't make it the wrong thing to do.
17
The judge is correct. This isn't something people should vote on. The decision as to what extent (if any) to cooperate with federal immigration officials is a matter of professional discretion (how best to allocate resources to provide the most effective law enforcement possible to the greatest number of people), not a basic policy stance. If you don't like how your elected officials are exercising this authority, you can vote to replace them in the next election. But until then, it's their call, not the citizenry's.
18
@7: First, I do think that borders and national sovereignty are outdated concepts. Like "neighborhood preservation," these are nice-sounding ideas that really come down to claiming territory for certain groups of people, largely determined by their place of birth (which is just as random and immutable as race or sex). But I understand that reasonable people may feel it's impractical to fully eradicate borders (just as we are far from a world without nukes).

Much as I'd love to think half the country is coming to my position, what seems to be happening is a reaction to excessive orthodoxy on the Right. We have a messy situation where for many years people have been trying to meet in the middle: enforcing controls on immigration while taking the human impact into account. Obama steps up border funding and deportations of criminals, but also presses Congress to find a path to citizenship for the millions of law-abiding economic refugees who are here.

The Right has refused to seriously participate in this conversation; in fact, they're busy making up new lies about legal immigrants being a drain on our economy. Faced with such intransigence, decent people start to question whether larger, structural change is needed. So, yet again, refusal to compromise leads to further polarization.
19
Why is it that everytime someone opposes illegal immigration they aee labeled white supremacists, or white nationalists? We have laws in this country considering illegals. Just like every other country in the world. (Just look at Mexico's law) We need to adhere to the laws on the books. To turn back illegal immigration, and stop being afraid of the label these (are they to be considered a hate group? ) group's try to sling to get their way. It is time to take our country back. If your a legal immigrant, just as my great grandfather was, then welcome. You did the work. Jumped through the hoops. You earned it. Just like so many others. But if you are illegal, why do you feel entitled? You no more belong here than than a banana tree in time square. Go.
20
@18 Wow man, you don't, like, believe in borders and sovereignty? That's totally cool of you, bro. Way to keep your ideas from being constrained by the man, man. Seriously, shut up while grown folks talk.

An 87% majority of Americans believe we should allow illegal immigrants to stay if they pay taxes, a penalty, and can pass a background check.Myself among them. 83% believe in enhanced border security via infrastructure and technology. But until we get a GD reform bill through congress, enforce the existing law and quit crying about racism when SO MANY PEOPLE don't fucking care about that at all. It just makes you seem like you're trying to cram that square peg in every odd shaped hole you see.
21
What I can't grasp is how far left the left has gone on this issue. I think both Obama and Trump have done a suitable job addressing probably the most difficult issue facing the world today. Yet, even Obama's approach to immigration is being derided as fascist and racist. Can't we all go back to more sensible views on the topic?
22
@muffy
Yes, if you're positing the idea that the U.S. immigration policy(among other policies) is not now nor ever was racist, then that is the text book definition of willful ignorance. I don't have the time nor desire to argue about it. I really just wanted to know what kind of Troll you are. It's clear you're in it for the love of the Troll because you aren't clever enough to be paid for this shit.
23
@13: it's White Nativists making the argument for booting ALL illegal immigrants, as @19. I've heard the ignorant xenophobia from my own father as well, so I'm not buying your "it's just law and order" argument. it's race-based, self-centered fear, which is integral to the history of America.

Trump didn't scapegoating the Irish, he scapegoated Latinos.
24
the democrats supported a law and order approach to immigration under Obama. my question to the fucking idiots, @22, @23, is what has changed? Why is it racist to support Obama's stance on immigration? It's been the rule of the land for a long time and now anyone who supports the status quo is a facist racist? do you understand how idiotic and destructive your views have become?
25
@24 perhaps people wouldn't think you a hate-filled bottom-rung human if you didn't preface your questions by calling the people being questioned "fucking idiots".
You have the ridiculous views of Steve Bannon coupled with the communication skills of Sean Spicer. No wonder it was so easy for others to take your job.
26
@22. Of course you don't want to argue about it. You don't have any facts to back up your side of an argument. Facts like laws or examples to back up your claim. Just keep jamming that square peg in every problem you come across, champ. It's working like a charm.
27
@26 You know, it is working like a charm! My life is awesome! Thanks for noticing, although is that jealousy I read in your comment? That's unbecoming.
28
@12: There is of course a spectrum of positions on the topic, but at the end of the day the question remains as to what number or immigrants and how low the bar is for entry and how "moral" those standards are.

You seem to think that 50k per year is not moral enough, but what is your number? 100k? One million? And how is one number somehow "moral," but another number is not? Is it immoral to turn away a rapist, even if his family is in danger? Is it immoral to turn away thousands of people who will just be added to welfare rolls? Is it immoral to favor white people over brown people? Is it immoral to favor brown people over white people? Is it immoral to favor the educated over the uneducated, or the wealthy over the poor? Why?

At some point you have to decide if simply having these standards is immoral and racist. If having a border and protecting it is always going to be somewhat "racist." At what number does it stop being "racist" and start being "compassionate?"

There is no answer, because the question is bigger than scale. It addresses the very nature of nations themselves. A defining aspect of a sovereign nation is distinct borders that it can protect and control. Is this idea outdated and inherently racist, or can nations set their own criteria without being inherently racist?
29
@28 from the perspective of the new left those questions are now inherently racist since "the nation," in today's cartoon world, now means " the institution of white supremacy". The only bad thing about the Trump administration is its horrible rhetoric on this issue has pushed the insane left into a blatantly anti-American position. Even US Senators are supporting positions on immigration reform once reserved for anarchists. All in order to appease the anti-Trump fury of pathetic reactionaries. The worst part is that only a few years ago the idea of "open borders" would have been dismissed and shunned by the political elite in this country. Now, in order to both win a public relations battle and weaken the fabric of the nation, our elected officials are plotting the destruction of any barrier to unfettered immigration. Despicable since Obama's stance on immigration, not considering all aspects of DACA, was largely pragmatic and sensible. If Trump would have just left the immigration issue alone then this whole mess about "open borders" could have been entirely avoided. Now the idiots in this country think we should open the floodgates to anyone and everyone without regard for how the influx of criminals and welfare dependents would weaken our society long-term.
30
@29 HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! Dey took yer jib!