A total Republican lack of values on immigration

[mercury14]

According to a new Washington post poll, 60% of Republicans think illegal immigrants should be granted a path to citizenship. But when the question mentions that Obama supports it, Republican support flip-flops to opposing immigration reform with a mere 39% supporting it.

This just highlights another way the GOP puts party over country, nothing new. But with such naked politics and anti-patriotism, what reason does anyone have to take Republican Party seriously in 2013?

 

[LiFeNdEaTh]

interesting..

 

[Sam37]

Yet somehow we're supposed to believe that democrats place country over personal power?


Hahahahabahahabahaha.

The party of do as I say, not as I do.

I have not changed my position in 30 years. Rewarding law-breaking cannot lead to law-following. It is a clear logical fallacy.

Yes, we need immigration reform. Amnesty ain't the answer. The Dream Act is a greater logical fallacy that amnesty.

 

[hogjack]

60% of Republicans think illegal immigrants should be granted a path to citizenship.

People cheating the law is encouraged and the 40% of the Republicans who don't get it are being stubborn.

The dopes are those immigrants who wait to be granted legal citizenship.

 

[kbate]

Now is the time for Health Care reform.
Now is the time for Immigration reform.
Now is the time for Meaningful Gun Control.
Now is the time to Bring Wall Street under control.
Now is the time to pass a stimulus bill.
Now is the time to pass my Jobs bill.
Now is the time to _____________. (fill in your non-partisan patriotic issue of the week)

 

[Sean Renaud]

Now is the time for Health Care reform.
Now is the time for Immigration reform.
Now is the time for Meaningful Gun Control.
Now is the time to Bring Wall Street under control.
Now is the time to pass a stimulus bill.
Now is the time to pass my Jobs bill.
Now is the time to _____________. (fill in your non-partisan patriotic issue of the week)

Funny. OBama seems to be hacking away at that list rather effectively.

 

[kbate]

Funny. OBama seems to be hacking away at that list rather effectively.

Did you eat paint chips as a child?

 

[Sean Renaud]

No, but you apparently did.

 

[mercury14]

Yet somehow we're supposed to believe that democrats place country over personal power?


Hahahahabahahabahaha.

The party of do as I say, not as I do.

I have not changed my position in 30 years. Rewarding law-breaking cannot lead to law-following. It is a clear logical fallacy.

Yes, we need immigration reform. Amnesty ain't the answer. The Dream Act is a greater logical fallacy that amnesty.

Whatever rant this is has nothing to do with the thread. The topic is that many Republicans are willing to attack their own agenda if they think Obama agrees with it. They're willing to defeat the very issues they believe in (hurting America and possibly their own party) if they think it will hurt Obama in some way.

But to your point I can't think of any instances where Democrats tried to block their own agenda because of Bush. Erm... can you?

 

[mercury14]

Funny. OBama seems to be hacking away at that list rather effectively.

You and I can put another ten items on the list that Obama has either made progress toward or completed. Then folks will show up saying Obama hasn't done anything.

 

[hogjack]

Did you eat paint chips as a child?

The tasty sky blue ones?

Sure. Everyone did. Fucking addictive!

 

[LiFeNdEaTh]

didn't obama wanted to make mexico legal?? like part of USA??

 

[Sean Renaud]

You and I can put another ten items on the list that Obama has either made progress toward or completed. Then folks will show up saying Obama hasn't done anything.

Unless it was one of those days where Obama has been doing way to much and fucking up the universe. In which case neither of us will be able to keep track of all the millions and millions of things he did, many of which started before he was elected and a few probably started before he was even born.

 

[KyleW]

didn't obama wanted to make mexico legal?? like part of USA??

Just stop breathing. It would mean one less moron taking up oxygen in this world.

Do it for world peace.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Most Americans put their shoulders to the wheel to free the wagon from the mire, Democrats sit in the wagon and bitch about how long it takes the rest to free the wagon.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Most Americans put their shoulders to the wheel to free the wagon from the mire, Democrats sit in the wagon and bitch about how long it takes the rest to free the wagon.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Do you ever even bother to see what a thread's topic is, or do you just post your nonsense wherever you happen to be drooling at the time?

For fuck's sake.

 

[Lancecastor]

Most Americans put their shoulders to the wheel to free the wagon from the mire, Democrats sit in the wagon and bitch about how long it takes the rest to free the wagon.

"Screw the System...Systemize the Screw!"

that's mine, but you can use it, comrade.

 

[jeninflorida]

here is the issue, people broke the law when they came into America.

So Merc, why do you want to reward criminals?

should we allow other criminals to go free? Maybe next month we can reward murders?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

here is the issue, people broke the law when they came into America.

So Merc, why do you want to reward criminals?

should we allow other criminals to go free? Maybe next month we can reward murders?

How do you feel about Nixon?

 

[jeninflorida]

How do you feel about Nixon?

he's dead

 

[Ishmael]

Most conservatives are aware of Obama's immigration plan. For example, not securing the border (that worked out so well the last time). We want nothing to do with Obama's plan.........period.

Ishmael

 

[Sean Renaud]

here is the issue, people broke the law when they came into America.

So Merc, why do you want to reward criminals?

should we allow other criminals to go free? Maybe next month we can reward murders?

We don't really have a good alternative open to us.

Most conservatives are aware of Obama's immigration plan. For example, not securing the border (that worked out so well the last time). We want nothing to do with Obama's plan.........period.

Ishmael

Except Obama has been tougher on border control than any recent president. Does he actually need a moat filled with sharks with frickin lasers and two electric fences before his plan is at least viewed as a step in the right direction?

 

[jeninflorida]

We don't really have a good alternative open to us.



Except Obama has been tougher on border control than any recent president. Does he actually need a moat filled with sharks with frickin lasers and two electric fences before his plan is at least viewed as a step in the right direction?

Interesting thought, not your usual. What has the obama done to improve the economy?

 

[Ham Murabi]

Vin Suprynowicz
Try amnesty without the hypocrisy


Posted: Feb. 10, 2013 | 2:05 a.m.

Delegates preparing to cave on amnesty for another 10 million to 14 million illegal immigrants might want to take a gander at a new Pulse Opinion Research survey of 1,000 likely voters nationwide, available at http://tiny********/axlxkyn.

"A new poll using neutral language - and avoiding the false choice of conditional legalization vs. mass deportations - finds that most Americans want illegal immigrants to return to their home counties, rather than be given legal status," reports Steven A. Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies, an outfit that would appear to agree with that recommendation.

Of likely voters, 52 percent responded they'd prefer to see illegal immigrants go back to their home countries, compared to just 33 percent who want them given legal status, the poll found.

Furthermore, of those who want illegal immigrants to head home, 73 percent said they felt "very strongly" about that, while just 35 percent of those who want illegal immigrants to get legal status said they felt very strongly about it.

Which means amnesty opponents are more likely to let their votes for politicians be guided by the issue.

When asked why there are so many illegals in the country to begin with, voters overwhelming (71 percent) thought it was because Uncle Sam had made no real effort to enforce immigration laws.

Another reason for skepticism about amnesty is that most voters polled (69 percent) agreed with the statement: "Giving legal status to illegal immigrants does not solve the problem because rewarding law breaking will only encourage more illegal immigration." When asked if they had confidence that immigration laws would be enforced after a new amnesty or "legalization," just 27 percent expressed confidence there would be enforcement; 70 percent doubted it.

And enforcement remains popular. Of likely voters, 53 percent indicated they're more likely to support a political party that supports enforcing immigration laws, vs. 32 percent who'd support the legalization party.

Meantime, a simple exercise should help us determine whether those now calling for "comprehensive immigration reform" are in fact interested primarily in amnesty for those here illegally.

Hand them a proposal that's a virtual wish list of potent immigration reforms, omitting only one. Offer them a renewed "bracero" program allowing temporary workers to enter the country in large numbers to do seasonal work (largely agricultural), as long as they leave their families at home. Offer a huge expansion in the number of work visas for immigrants who can show there's an American job waiting for them that the employer can't find a qualified American to fill, or that will generate more American jobs than it takes away.

Require American embassies to grant travel papers to any worker for whom an American employer has acquired such proper papers from the U.S. Department of Labor (rather than treating chefs with jobs waiting for them at Indian restaurants here, for example, as "guilty till proven innocent" of intending to overstay their visas.) Hand "reformers" a plan that "secures the border" so effectively that mine fields can be laid on our side, with no concern that anyone will be blown up, since after all, "The border is now secure."

Offer them all that, omitting only amnesty (they'll want to call it "a path to citizenship") for the illegals.

They'll howl in outrage. They won't take it.

Now offer them the amnesty, while removing everything else. What do you think they'll say?

Libertarians traditionally favor open borders. I have my doubts, since statists will often abandon the hellholes created by their own collectivist policies, flocking to the relative prosperity of a free-market enclave, where they quickly form a functioning electoral majority and start demanding the same freedom-destroying redistributionist policies that led them to flee New York or Chicago.

Case in point? Las Vegas.

But I suppose if some kind of supermajority really wants open borders and amnesty, I could be talked into it, with one provision.

You want scofflaws to be able to make a mockery of the power of the U.S. Congress to set immigration policy? Then at least let us hear no more dog drool about "securing the borders."

The amnesty gang promised to "secure the borders" in 1986, when Ronald Reagan got sold this same bill of goods - an amnesty for a modest 3 million illegals, as I recall - and the product of those "sealed borders" is the additional 10 million to 15 million more now marching in the streets with Mexican flags, shouting that they want to "reclaim" the stolen states of "Aztlan."

But you know what? I'm willing. I'm willing to support an amnesty for every illegal alien currently in this country, on one condition.

Rather than again promising to "secure the borders" - and then doing nothing of the sort - let's take this to its logical, non-hypocritical conclusion: an amnesty for every illegal immigrant currently in this country, and an invitation for anyone who wants to come into this country, from anywhere in the world, to do so, no questions asked.

Close down the passport offices; they'll no longer be required. Close down the border checkpoints and customs stations. Repeal the immigration laws. You don't have to have any "papers" to come here, to work here, to drive a car, anything. If 50 million new immigrants beach their boats on our sands in the next year, fine.

Mind you, your tax-supported youth internment and propaganda camps ("public schools") will go bankrupt and collapse under the strain within a year or two. So will your tax-funded public hospitals and emergency rooms.

I guess I could live with that, if you insist. Anyone who wants medical attention or to have their kid tutored will have to pay cash, preferably silver - a system that worked fine for centuries, right up through 1964, in the case of medical care.

Take the huge insurance and government bureaucracies out of the picture, and "cash" prices for basic educational and medical services will drop through the floor, by the way.

Of course, the very people whose endless demands for amnesty must lead to the eventual collapse of these tax-funded welfare institutions will squawk that this is a heartless prescription.

But all I was doing was agreeing to their demand, while attempting to remove the hypocrisy.

Instead they'll go on hassling American citizens with their airport searches and seizures; their labor union backers will kill the bracero program again (since they consider it pointless to unionize a worker who's going home to Mexico in November), and they'll be right back again to demand another amnesty for the next 50 million trespassers in the year 2040.

Right?

Vin Suprynowicz, a Review-Journal editorial writer, is author of "Send in the Waco Killers" and the novel "The Black Arrow." See www.vinsuprynowicz.com.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Interesting thought, not your usual. What has the obama done to improve the economy?

Stimulus Bill.

Other than that very little. Like the centrist that he is he refuses to pump money into the economy by spending. Somehow he figures that if he cuts government spending that people will increase buying. Which is the exact opposite of true but oh well.