comment: >
  
  So you think the right has either of our best interests at heart?! Stop with the us verses them mentality please. Have you compared how other developed nations in the world deal with citizenship and immigration?
context: I saw a documentary about Colorado shipping homeless people to California years ago. Even had a song about it. >
  
  Red states still do that. Then they sit there mocking the homeless issues in California, Oregon, etc. >
  
  Red towns do it too.
  Wealthy suburb cops will just grab any homeless they see, drive em into the nearest big blue city, and drop them off at a homeless encampment. >
  
  Jesus… and there was me thinking that the start of Rambo just wasn’t all that believable cos a cop would never do that in real life. >
  
  Relevant text:
  
  Polis announced on Jan. 3 that Colorado would facilitate in transporting of migrants who arrived in Denver to their "final destinations," noting that about 70% of the migrants did not consider Denver as their destination. The release added that weather and workforce shortages at the time attributed to travel cancellations for many migrants.
  New York Mayor Eric Adams had responded before Polis issued that announcement. Joining 77WABC's "Sid and Friends in the Morning," Adams informed listeners that Polis notified him on Monday about busing migrants from Colorado.
  "This is just unfair for local governments to have to take on this national obligation," Adams said. "We've done our job. There's no more room at the end, but we are compelled by local laws here that we must provide shelter."
  
  So yes, unlike with Abbot, Polis was literally facilitating these folks getting to where they were trying to go.  But Republicans have to try to "both sides" with something, and this is the best they got. >
  
  What’s ridiculous is state’s and cities publicly advertising themselves as sanctuaries that will shelter and support illegal immigrants and then working out deals with other states to stop immigrants from getting to the self proclaimed sanctuaries. Not fair? It’s not fair to turn your back on the people you welcomed and promised to protect. 
  Yes border security is a federal responsibility, border states have been calling this out for years while sanctuary states and cities have promised to undermine border protections by sheltering people violating the U.S. border laws.
  Also, we consider what Texas and Florida did to be human trafficking, isn’t preventing them from going where they want kidnapping? >
  
  Just a clarification- sanctuary cities simply means they are going to use local funds to support and enforce local laws and regulations. Federal funds should be used for federal laws and regulations, such as immigration. They aren’t saying they’re a safe haven for immigrants, they’re saying that they’re not going to arrest someone solely for being an undocumented immigrant and hold them for who knows how long for ICE to show up and deport them, spending lots of resources on someone who isn’t actually a danger to the community. >
  
  In the words of Karl Marx in regard to 19th century Irish immigration to England:
  
  Ireland constantly sends her own surplus to the English labor market, and thus forces down wages and lowers the material and moral position of the English working class. >
  
  Ireland was under British rule. The same nation, back then. Try again. It’s like complaining Californians are coming to Texas now. >
  
  Shouldn't those that support open borders enthusiastically support helping migrants reach their final destination? 
  Because if you don't then you actually don't support open borders. You're just supporting opening one border then hoping that the "border" of expenses/language barrier is closed keeping them from crossing the borders of your own city/county/state. 
  It is demeaning when some states trick people onto buses and do stunt dropoffs but in this case we're dealing with hypocrisy. >
  
  Who supports open borders? >
  
  Open borders, or advocacy of a state of affairs in which the application of immigration law is either spotty, resulting in a appreciable stream of migrants without papers or non-existent. 
  If you're gonna look at me with a straight face and tell me that progressive bastions such as NYC and Chicago didn't have solid pluralities or even outright majorities that supported such a state of affairs prior to all the buses I'd call you a liar.
  NY and Chicago either accept migrants who desire to be with their friends/families/compatriots and truly live out their values or they're hypocrites. >
  
  No sane person who understands economic and how the world actually works supports “open borders”. 
  The right wing like to tar anyone vaguely left with this completely extremist, fantasy view of “what the left wants”. It’s great for votes and outrage. Sometimes the far left fringe is their own worst enemy, with the stuff they come up with. >
  
  
  If you're gonna look at me with a straight face and tell me that progressive bastions such as NYC and Chicago didn't have solid pluralities or even outright majorities that supported such a state of affairs prior to all the buses I'd call you a liar.
  
  Then you'll have to call me a liar because I've lived within an hour of both New York and Chicago and open borders isn't a popular policy in either of those places. Open borders isn't a popular policy among progressives in general. You can find a few who support it, but for the most part progressives just want better treatment for illegal immigrants and to make the legal immigration process more accessible. >
  
  Yup. Only an insane fringe want “open borders” or will argue with you on “what they mean”… despite using that insane language. It’s just as bad as abolish the police entirely as a solution to policing issues. ( even if they don’t actually mean that, it’s an idiotic catch phrase that gives the far right ammunition against sane solutions for years. ) >
  
  Typical center-right Democrats pretending on the one hand that they're progressive and then lighting up rows of strawman when criticism from the left shows up. 
  Do you people actually believe in anything? >
  
  I moved from Co a few years ago, but this behavior seems weird from Polis. I get the struggle of having people and no resources, but I’m surprised to see he took this route. >
  
  Yeah I’ve been asking around because I know quite a few people who are immigrants or work with immigrant communities, and it seems like these folks were unable to get to Chicago and NYC because transportation was a mess from the winter storm, but they wanted to go. It’s very different than kidnapping people like Abbott did. 
  If they were trying to get to other cities where they have family or friends, then chartering a bus to help them get there is a good thing. People are not going to need much assistance in the form of emergency shelters if they have community support at their destination. >
  
  Yeah, I'm trying to point out the distinctions but I'm getting downvoted. >
  
  Yeah nuance comes here to die. >
  
  Better headline: “Colorado Governor confirms Denver isn’t good enough for 70% of migrants, who want to go elsewhere.” ( it’s in the article ) >
  
  They didn't care about immigrants until they were on there doorstep, how ironic >
  
  Do you really think that NYC and Chicago don't get immigrants? >
  
  The difference was they did it legally like my family did >
  
  Considering the process has changed drastically since your family did it, maybe you should reconsider.  After all criminal prosecutions for illegal border crossing didn't happen until 2004.
  Immigration law has drastically changed within our lifetimes, and become incredibly restrictive relative to what it was for the entirety of American history.  For all the poeple decrying "semi-open borders" we have the most shut borders America has ever had in its history.  And that's not even tackling the question of "Was it even smart to change our immigration policy away from the one under which we became the world's foremost superpower, or were we just in shock from 9/11?" >
  
  I'm actually quite familiar with the system. I know how expensive it is, how long it takes and that it needs an overhaul. I also know that the vast majority of Americans couldn't pass the test. However now it has become a political point with sanctuary cities, locking people in cages, pandering to certain demographics, those seeking asylum or whatever other rhetoric you wish to include. 
  To gain access to one of the greatest countries in the world you just have to claim asylum since Central America is in it's current state.
  I feel bad for them just as I do those that can't afford basic necessities. However we turn a blind eye to those already here and send aid and attention elsewhere which makes zero sense to me. >
  
  
  However now it has become a political point with sanctuary cities, locking people in cages, pandering to certain demographics, those seeking asylum or whatever other rhetoric you wish to include. 
  
  Right, the political point being that one side is anti-immigrant nativists who have extreme overlap with the racist elements in the nation, and the other side just treats them like normal people?
  It should be easy to immigrate to America, that is the immigration policy under which we became the world's foremost economic powerhouse.