Do you want the AMNESTY bill for illegal aliens to pass?

[JoeB131]

You are full of nonsense if you think we believe you will do the rest after the first bill is passed.

No.

The whole thing or nothing.

And if it is nothing, then we go electorally after the office holders in both parties that held it up.

Why should we?

Frankly, the real thing you guys fear is that if we were able to ever secure the border, there's no good reason to give amnesty.

And let's be honest why amnesty is unfair. There are a lot of people who went through the process to emigrate legally, paid the fees, found a job, got a sponsor, learned the language, and someone who hopped over a fence gets there first? Seriously?

Again, you can end this illegal problem in a year. Go after the wealthy people who hire them.

The Gang of 8 reform bill is a joke, nothing in it does anything to stop illegal immigration, and this is how it was designed. As I stated in the Arpaio thread the whole secure the border thing is nothing more than a ruse, a meaningless sleight of hand, a con, being played out on the American people. The simple fact is border security is just an obstacle not a deterrent the only thing that will stop illegal immigration is a strong deterrent.

Okay, you've convinced me.

I'm against the Gang of 8 bill or anything related to it. I hope it dies in the House.

Get back to me when you get something that stops illegal immigration.

 

[Zoom-boing]

I agree with JoeB.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The borders must be secured as part of a package that includes reform and economic business sanctions.

If the bill does not stop illegal immigration, then I agree it should die.

 

[Zoom-boing]

[MENTION=20412]JakeStarkey[/MENTION]

Fix the border first, jail and fine businesses who hire illegals, and only when that has been addressed turn to reform. It's bullshit to address it all at once. Another thousand page bill like ACA?

The bullshit is to not address all of it in an omnibus bill. It all has to be done as one, or nothing will be done.

Can you stop deleting my name when you quote me? I makes it hard to find your replies and hard for anyone else to know who you are replying to. Thanks.

You didn't answer my question. Who were you referring to when you said "we" and "you"? Cause I'm reading it as "we" being Dems and "you" being Repubs.

Nope. It didn't work when Reagan tried it - congress squelched the border security part - it won't work now. Talks is cheap. Fix the damn borders, whack the damn businesses then reform -- real reform, not some half-assed 'pass'. People who do illegal things should not get any type of pass. If one enters the US illegally then wants to become legal? They get to go the long way around ... for entering illegally in the first place.

 

[longknife]

A shanty town in the State of Mexico. 51% of Mexicans live in moderate to extreme poverty, according to national statistics.

http://www.usembassy-mexico.gov/pdf/2010_Poverty_Fact_Sheet.pdf

This is a reason to oppose amnesty.

IMHO it's a matter of what you consider to be poverty.

There are many Mexicans who have far more than the so-called "poor" of the U.S.

They may not live with all the gadgets and goodies, but they have far more freedom from government interference than we.

I've visited small Mexican pueblos with unpaved or cobblestoned streets where each family owned their own land and home, had electricity, running water, sewage, and even tvs, telephones, swamp coolers or a/c, and lots of other amenities.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Please understand that I am addressing comments, not individuals. Eliminating posters' names is completely within the rules, so that a person can address only the remarks.

Reagan's bill did not work because it was not a comprehensive omnibus legislation.

This legislation is supposed to be such omnibus bill.

If it is not, vote against it.

No immigration reform without border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

 

[Polk]

In Mexico they vote 70% socialist anyways. This is the poor of mexico tooo...

Got new for ya, Homer. The current government of Mexico is CONSERVATIVE and the previous socialist PAN is having a very hard time standing up to the PRI and its coalition.

You've got it backwards. The current president is a socialist. The PRI is a socialist party that held power in Mexico for most of the 20th century. The PAN is the conservative party in Mexico and while they hold the most seats in congress they don't have a majority in either chamber.

You're right that PAN is a conservative party, but the PRI is not a socialist party. It's centrist (but with a slightly more liberal lean overall). The Mexican left is the PRD.

 

[Kondor3]

"...No immigration reform without border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions."

No problem.

We plug the leaks first in the dam first.

Then we start bailing-out the flood water.

Then we shore-up the dam to ensure that it doesn't leak again.

But there's no point in beginning to bail-out the flood water until the leaks are stopped.

And that we're confident that the dam repair-guys have learned how to do their job properly.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Never, because your side is not trust worthy and you don't have the numbers anymore to dictate the eventual outcome.

An entire package with all three components must be built and enacted into law so it will happen.

If you don't, the Hispanic population will make the Dems the majority party for generations to come.

The far right will lose this battle, eventually, one way or another.

 

[Zoom-boing]

Please understand that I am addressing comments, not individuals. Eliminating posters' names is completely within the rules, so that a person can address only the remarks.

Reagan's bill did not work because it was not a comprehensive omnibus legislation.

This legislation is supposed to be such omnibus bill.

If it is not, vote against it.

No immigration reform without border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

Never said eliminating someone's name from a quote was against the rules, was asking if you could leave the name in as it's easier to respond to. Of course you're addressing individuals ... you're addressing the individual's comment.

No immigration reform without border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

Almost. No immigration reform until border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.


Noticed you failed to answer my previous question. Like previous times. Guess that's your m.o.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No immigration reform without border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

Almost. No immigration reform until border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

Not at all. The majority have informed the minority (your side) if it does not get on board, the borders will be opened.

The minority does not tell the majority what to do without great penalty.

 

[Kondor3]

"Never, because your side is not trust worthy..."

OUR side? What side would that be? The only side that I am aware of that is worth being-on in this context is the side of the American People, rather than 12,000,000 invaders.

"...and you don't have the numbers anymore to dictate the eventual outcome..."

WHO does not 'have the numbers'?

"...An entire package with all three components must be built and enacted into law so it will happen..."

Then it may very well not happen. We will see, apparently, without a matter of months.

You were beaten in 2006 and 2007 in House and Senate and you may very well be beaten again.

All it takes is enough people with the spine or backbone to stand up to your brand of Ethnic Saber-Rattling.

For the sake of the Republic we can only hope.

Again, we will know soon enough.

"...If you don't, the Hispanic population will make the Dems the majority party for generations to come..."

Then DO it... if you CAN... bring it... the American People will NOT be bullied by Ethnic Blackmail... although some of our gutless, nutless politicians might be a-feared, until they realize that they have The People behind them after all.

"...The far right will lose this battle, eventually, one way or another.""

I don't give a damn about the Far Right... me... I care about the American Middle Class, and the American People as a whole, rather than a particular ethnic voting bloc.

Despite what our elected politicians tell us... the Corporatists and sell-outs and Vote-Whores in Washington D.C., that is... any such Bill is a bad idea... a very bad idea... and very bad for America.

It doesn't get any easier to comprehend than that.

 

[Kondor3]

"...The majority have informed the minority (your side) if it does not get on board, the borders will be opened..."

One batch of Impeachment and Treason Trials comin' right up... cool... we're calling your bluff... DO it... IF you CAN... bring it...

 

[JakeStarkey]

"...The majority have informed the minority (your side) if it does not get on board, the borders will be opened..."

One batch of Impeachment and Treason Trials comin' right up... cool... we're calling your bluff... DO it... IF you CAN... bring it...

You don't have the power anymore, period. You don't have the numbers, and the Hispanic voters outnumber you more and more every year in the key states.

TPM talks stupidly, gets punished at the polls. Simple math.

 

[Zoom-boing]

No immigration reform without border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

Almost. No immigration reform until border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

Not at all. The majority have informed the minority (your side) if it does not get on board, the borders will be opened.

The minority does not tell the majority what to do without great penalty.

My side?? wtf? Borders will be opened if 'my side' doesn't tow the line? wtf?? Love how you throw this shit out, ignore questions for clarification, and pronounce some odd ultimatum.

Know who you sound like? Obama.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nonsense. The bill passes with all THREE parts enshrined in it, or the situation continues, and the Hispanics will make the GOP the minority party nationally for generations.

Is that what you want?

 

[Kondor3]

The Hispanics vote for Democrats anyway... zero-sum game... no biggie... go for it...

 

[Meister]

No immigration reform without border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

Almost. No immigration reform until border security and prohibitive economic business sanctions.

Not at all. The majority have informed the minority (your side) if it does not get on board, the borders will be opened.

The minority does not tell the majority what to do without great penalty.

Jake, you're looking like a goofball trying to sell this stuff.
If the uninformed just knew how weak this bill actually is, they wouldn't want it either.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Got new for ya, Homer. The current government of Mexico is CONSERVATIVE and the previous socialist PAN is having a very hard time standing up to the PRI and its coalition.

You've got it backwards. The current president is a socialist. The PRI is a socialist party that held power in Mexico for most of the 20th century. The PAN is the conservative party in Mexico and while they hold the most seats in congress they don't have a majority in either chamber.

You're right that PAN is a conservative party, but the PRI is not a socialist party. It's centrist (but with a slightly more liberal lean overall). The Mexican left is the PRD.

The PRI is a member of the Socialist International

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Nonsense. The bill passes with all THREE parts enshrined in it, or the situation continues, and the Hispanics will make the GOP the minority party nationally for generations.

Is that what you want?

I'll ask you again why Reagan's amnesty did nothing to win their vote, yet somehow this will?