I'm trying to understand this position. From O'Reilly tonight. Click the image for video:
O'Reilly: “Do you object to migrants coming to the USA?”
Trump: “I hate the concept of it but on a humanitarian basis you have to.”
So we're supposed to accept unvetted migrants from Syria but not from Mexico, El Salvador, or elsewhere south of the border? A genuine question: Where is the consistency with this? Even if we accepted only Christian migrants, how is that vetted? We protest against allowing Mexican and South American migrants in without any verifable proof of age or relations (when invoking DACA and DAPA) but this is somehow acceptable? Who is to vet the influx of Syrian migrants? How are they to be tracked? We can't track immigrants or aliens here now. Government agencies are already overburdened due to our porous border. Is the solution to expand the size of government to accommodate the influx of migrants? Is that a conservative principle? Before the west considers cleaning up a problem majorly created by proxy war power-jockeying, shouldn’t rich gulf nations handle this crisis? How is it the west's responsibility?
Additionally, if current political discourse won’t allow honest questions like these, it was nice having a republic while it lasted.
