Trump struggles with the basics on history and civics in DACA tweet

[BmorePat87]

As the Senate is close to passing a bill on DACA, Trump is threatening to veto it



https://www.axios.com/trump-threatens-veto-on-immigration-deal1518567345-e8f00a68-9185-47fa-85f0-4722f56a4e39.html


So does he think his narrative of Republicans wanting this more than Democrats will hold water after he reversed DACA and then vetoed a bill restoring it?

[GMDino]

(02-15-2018, 01:04 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: As the Senate is close to passing a bill on DACA, Trump is threatening to veto it



https://www.axios.com/trump-threatens-veto-on-immigration-deal1518567345-e8f00a68-9185-47fa-85f0-4722f56a4e39.html


So does he think....

Pretty much answers your own question right there...

[StLucieBengal]

(02-14-2018, 02:27 PM)Griever Wrote: can we get rid of ivankas parents? since they came over due to "chain migration"

or is it different because they are white

Ivanka’s Parents did not come via chain migration. Her father is a USC and her mother was a primary applicant.

———

Now you also probably meant Ivana.... which is ivanka’s mother. And while you don’t seem to understand chain migration either. Parents would still be able to come via the Cotton/Miller plan. It’s the cousins, aunts, and uncles they wouldn’t be able to come.

[GMDino]

Melania's parents too.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/02/14/white-house-wont-reveal-immigration-status-of-melanias-parents/23361643/

Quote:The White House is happy to discuss its harsh immigration policies that have been seen breaking up families just so long as you don't make it personal.



Amid widely circulating social media posts suggesting that Melania Trump's parents are able to live in the U.S. permanently thanks to "chain migration" — a derogatory term describing how immigrants bring their extended family into the country — the Washington Post attempted to learn the immigration status of Viktor and Amalija Knavs only to have the White House shut down any possible clarification.


"I don't comment on her parents, as they live private lives and are not part of the administration," said Stephanie Grisham, the first lady's spokeswoman.


Reports suggest the Knavs have been living in the country for a year, during which time they have stayed at the White House, Mar-a-Lago, Trump Tower and Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J., as they help look after Donald and Melania Trump's son Barron.

Upon speaking with immigration experts, the Washington Post learned that Viktor and Amalija Knavs could be in the country legally thanks to an extended tourist visa or a visa given to parents of a U.S. citizen, which the Trump administration supposedly wants to eliminate as it ends "extended-family chain migration."


Additionally, Melania's parents could have requested parole into the country or they could be in the country on student visas.

Mysteriously though, Grisham shot down each of these explanations for how the retired textile factory worker and her former Yugoslav Communist Party member husband continue to remain in America.



"None of those options apply," she said.

[*michaelsean*]

(02-15-2018, 01:50 PM)GMDino Wrote: Melania's parents too.

https://www.aol.com/article/news/2018/02/14/white-house-wont-reveal-immigration-status-of-melanias-parents/23361643/

So....nothing.

And why is "chain migration" derogatory?

[GMDino]

(02-15-2018, 02:01 PM)michaelsean Wrote: So....nothing.

And why is "chain migration" derogatory?

So something.

Quote:Additionally, Melania's parents could have requested parole into the country or they could be in the country on student visas.


Mysteriously though, Grisham shot down each of these explanations for how the retired textile factory worker and her former Yugoslav Communist Party member husband continue to remain in America.



"None of those options apply," she said.

because it is called "Family reunification".

Chain migration is a the prefered white nationalist term.

[BmorePat87]

(02-14-2018, 02:27 PM)Griever Wrote: can we get rid of ivankas parents? since they came over due to "chain migration"

or is it different because they are white

Melania's? The White House refuses to answer that question. Likely they're only here because she is. They're raising the kid, so they can't be using work visas unless they're conning the system.

Ivana wasn't a citizen when she married McDonalds Trump. She became one later. The noble practice of marrying an eastern european who desperate to not be in poverty because no English speaking American woman wants anything to do with you. 

His mom followed her siblings here and his grandfather followed his sister here, but that was before chain migration was a thing and we let almost anyone from Western Europe in. Open borders were their friends but they basically engaged in the process of chain migration

[StLucieBengal]

(02-15-2018, 02:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: So something.



because it is called "Family reunification".

Chain migration is a the prefered white nationalist term.

I have been a member for years in several immigration forums and chain migration is the term used by everyone. And these aren’t white nationalists on these forums.

Family reunification is just a politicized term made up by leftists to sound better in the media.

[CKwi88]

(02-15-2018, 01:25 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Ivanka’s Parents did not come via chain migration.   Her father is a USC and her mother was a primary applicant.  

———

Now you also probably meant Ivana.... which is ivanka’s mother.   And while you don’t seem to understand chain migration either.   Parents would still be able to come via the Cotton/Miller plan.   It’s the cousins, aunts, and uncles they wouldn’t be able to come.

Pretty sure aunts uncles and cousins already can't.

https://www.immihelp.com/greencard/familybasedimmigration/categories.html

[StLucieBengal]

(02-15-2018, 02:11 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Pretty sure aunts uncles and cousins already can't.

https://www.immihelp.com/greencard/familybasedimmigration/categories.html

Yeah I get that confused with adult children and their spouses and children.

Which we should be stopping

[Belsnickel]

(02-15-2018, 02:11 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I have been a member for years in several immigration forums and chain migration is the term used by everyone.   And these aren’t white nationalists on these forums.  

Family reunification is just a politicized term made up by leftists to sound better in the media.

Chain migration is a politicized term, as well. If we're going to use a more neutral term, we ought to use what is in the law, which is typically "family sponsorship" or "family-based migration." Both "chain migration" and "family reunification" are currently being used in a weaponized fashion in the public discourse with propagandic intentions.

[StLucieBengal]

(02-15-2018, 02:26 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Chain migration is a politicized term, as well. If we're going to use a more neutral term, we ought to use what is in the law, which is typically "family sponsorship" or "family-based migration." Both "chain migration" and "family reunification" are currently being used in a weaponized fashion in the public discourse with propagandic intentions.

For years everyone on these forums have used chain migration. Family migration is also used.

[Belsnickel]

(02-15-2018, 02:30 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: For years everyone on these forums have used chain migration. Family migration is also used.

I understand that. However, the implications and inferences regarding word choice can change given the societal context the conversation is taking place in. As the article I linked to points out, it was considered a dry, neutral, academic term for decades. The current political environment has changed this, though, and being cognizant of that alteration can help us adjust our language to have more productive conversations on the topic. When words that have a political charge behind them, words that are used in propaganda, are inserted into conversations it often results in people more firmly entrenching themselves in their per-determined positions. It makes us less receptive to information, even if it is more logical or factual than what we come to the conversation with.

[*michaelsean*]

(02-15-2018, 02:05 PM)GMDino Wrote: So something.



because it is called "Family reunification".

Chain migration is a the prefered white nationalist term.

It was a bunch of guessing with zero actual facts.  

[*michaelsean*]

(02-15-2018, 02:37 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I understand that. However, the implications and inferences regarding word choice can change given the societal context the conversation is taking place in. As the article I linked to points out, it was considered a dry, neutral, academic term for decades. The current political environment has changed this, though, and being cognizant of that alteration can help us adjust our language to have more productive conversations on the topic. When words that have a political charge behind them, words that are used in propaganda, are inserted into conversations it often results in people more firmly entrenching themselves in their per-determined positions. It makes us less receptive to information, even if it is more logical or factual than what we come to the conversation with.

So when the white power or whatever use this term are they using it incorrectly?  I mean, I'm sure they use a lot of terms and we really shouldn't have to change our vocabulary every time they say something.

[StLucieBengal]

(02-15-2018, 02:37 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I understand that. However, the implications and inferences regarding word choice can change given the societal context the conversation is taking place in. As the article I linked to points out, it was considered a dry, neutral, academic term for decades. The current political environment has changed this, though, and being cognizant of that alteration can help us adjust our language to have more productive conversations on the topic. When words that have a political charge behind them, words that are used in propaganda, are inserted into conversations it often results in people more firmly entrenching themselves in their per-determined positions. It makes us less receptive to information, even if it is more logical or factual than what we come to the conversation with.

Isn’t it time we just stopped being “triggered” by everything that we don’t agree with? Back in the day when that happened we just dealt with it and moved on.... we didn’t run to an adult and cry like a baby over someone using a word.

Words only have the power we give them. If you think he chain migration monster lives under your bed then you will Be In Fear.

The link just states it’s an academic term used for years and recently got politicized because the trump administration used it? ...... so it’s a negative word because the trump administration used an academic word when describing their immigration plan? That makes zero sense.

Toughen up. (This is for the people scared of the phrase chain migration)

[*bfine32*]

Who knew the term Chain Migration was racist?

[GMDino]

(02-15-2018, 03:48 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Who knew the term Chain Migration was racist?

I just learned it within the past few months.

A lot of people knew that racist prefer that term as a dog whistle to their followers.

Glad to educate those that didn't so they could stop using it.

[*bfine32*]

(02-15-2018, 03:58 PM)GMDino Wrote: I just learned it within the past few months.

A lot of people knew that racist prefer that term as a dog whistle to their followers.

Glad to educate those that didn't so they could stop using it.

So I should use Family Reunification?

[*michaelsean*]

(02-15-2018, 03:58 PM)GMDino Wrote: I just learned it within the past few months.

A lot of people knew that racist prefer that term as a dog whistle to their followers.

Glad to educate those that didn't so they could stop using it.

Ahhh yes.  The dog whistles everyone can hear.  Someone needs to go back to the drawing board.

I'm glad to be educated, but who decided it?  What's the appropriate termto use until it becomes the new dog whistle.