House leaders sell immigration blueprint

Deuce said:

What exactly is the problem with a path to citizenship?

Click to expand...

There's nothing wrong with a path to citizenship that starts with being here legally. There's a great big problem with a path to citizenship that starts out with "well, you didn't follow the most basic rules but I'm sure you're fine anyway."

Deuce said:

I think you're forgetting the other half of the equation: legal immigration.

If someone's goal is to come to the United States and make a better life for themselves, they have two options: legal or illegal. People will gravitate towards the easier or more attractive option. Right now, the legal method is a nightmare. It is probably the most convoluted, lengthy, expensive bureaucratic nonsense in our entire government, and that's saying a lot. And for a lot of people, it's not even actually an option. Many people simply don't have any path to become a citizen at all. Nope, sorry, you don't meet our criteria so you just can't come. Of course that person is going to jump the proverbial fence.

Click to expand...

1: Hundreds of thousands of legal immigrants follow the legal path every single day. They can to.
2: Whaa! They get told no so throw a temper tantrum and do it anyways? Would you let your child get away with that? If not then why would you allow complete strangers that break the law do it?
3: There HAS to be some sort of limit to allowing people into the country. Otherwise resources cannot keep up. "You must first be able to help yourself before you can help others". Thats a saying worth following. Because if you don't then you will get dragged down also.

Deuce said:

You guys seem to focus on making illegal immigration more unattractive, but the equation will never balance in favor of legal immigration unless we make drastic changes to that process. Changes, I suspect, people like you will never accept. I mean, listen to yourself. Anti-American. That's what you call people who want our borders to be more open. Question: You ever been to the statue of liberty?

Click to expand...

That poem that so many pro-illegal folks talk about was talking about LEGAL immigration. Why do you think that it was put in the biggest immigration city on the entire coast? Did you also know that even with that poem people were rejected and sent back?

And yes, making illegal immigration extremely unattractive WILL work. So long as it is actually enforced. Do you really think that illegals will come here if they have to live in the street? Get no schooling? No medical care? No jobs? No anchor babies allowed?

Since the USA acted that way 30 years ago, this is all the foreign speakers understand.
That and trying to make the almighty dollar .

Lutherf said:

There's nothing wrong with a path to citizenship that starts with being here legally. There's a great big problem with a path to citizenship that starts out with "well, you didn't follow the most basic rules but I'm sure you're fine anyway."

Click to expand...

Lutherf said:

There's nothing wrong with a path to citizenship that starts with being here legally. There's a great big problem with a path to citizenship that starts out with "well, you didn't follow the most basic rules but I'm sure you're fine anyway."

Click to expand...

Luther there is a big push for immigration reform aka amnesty by the Chamber of Commerce. Business wants cheap labor and they want it legally.

Chamber of Commerce 'determined' in push for immigration reform in 2014 - Washington Times

But on the flip side, the Speaker of the House is in real jeopardy of losing his position if he supports such a thing. Hell, Boehner is from my home state and he is already being challenged by other Republicans due to his "compromising" demeanor. I don't see him so willing to "compromise" as Paul Ryan seems to be over this issue.

Buchanan: Boehner Will Lose Speakership if He Pushes for Immigration Reform | National Review Online

My personal opinion is that this issue is dead. It will be met with such a force by most Republicans who know damn well their constituents would never agree to such a thing. Paul Ryan is a Republican elite. He made himself available to be the one who in "bipartisan" agreement to pass the first budget that Obama even agreed not to veto. What does that tell you? He was the ONLY Republican to give Obama a standing O when he talked about immigration during the SOTU address. What does that tell you?

vesper said:

Luther there is a big push for immigration reform aka amnesty by the Chamber of Commerce. Business wants cheap labor and they want it legally.

Chamber of Commerce 'determined' in push for immigration reform in 2014 - Washington Times

But on the flip side, the Speaker of the House is in real jeopardy of losing his position if he supports such a thing. Hell, Boehner is from my home state and he is already being challenged by other Republicans due to his "compromising" demeanor. I don't see him so willing to "compromise" as Paul Ryan seems to be over this issue.

Buchanan: Boehner Will Lose Speakership if He Pushes for Immigration Reform | National Review Online

My personal opinion is that this issue is dead. It will be met with such a force by most Republicans who know damn well their constituents would never agree to such a thing. Paul Ryan is a Republican elite. He made himself available to be the one who in "bipartisan" agreement to pass the first budget that Obama even agreed not to veto. What does that tell you? He was the ONLY Republican to give Obama a standing O when he talked about immigration during the SOTU address. What does that tell you?

Click to expand...

Yeah, I am hoping Price takes the Leadership. Ryan is looking to go to Ways and Means. Cantor, as far as I am concerned can stay where he is at.

Now that Boehner will retire after his term. The other Leaders should take front and center now.

MMC said:

Yeah, I am hoping Price takes the Leadership. Ryan is looking to go to Ways and Means. Cantor, as far as I am concerned can stay where he is at.

Now that Boehner will retire after his term. The other Leaders should take front and center now.

Click to expand...

Last I heard Boehner is planning on being Speaker after the 2014 elections. Are you sure that him retiring isn't just inside-the-Beltway parlor games? Personally Paul Ryan can take a hike. He is such a disappointment to me. And Cantor can go with him. :lol: Maybe it's the wine but at the moment I feel like cleaning House.

vesper said:

Last I heard Boehner is planning on being Speaker after the 2014 elections. Are you sure that him retiring isn't just inside-the-Beltway parlor games? Personally Paul Ryan can take a hike. He is such a disappointment to me. And Cantor can go with him. :lol: Maybe it's the wine but at the moment I feel like cleaning House.

Click to expand...

Yeah and dropping out for 2016.....I guess he thought slamming Obama on trade would make up for it. Others can't let him just roll over for the Dems.

MMC said:

Yeah and dropping out for 2016.....I guess he thought slamming Obama on trade would make up for it. Others can't let him just roll over for the Dems.

Click to expand...

I think that is exactly what Paul Ryan is up to. Unfortunately, he is one of the elites that thinks compromising to the point of losing yourself on core principles is suppose to win you an election. Even though compromisers who walk across the aisle like McCain who makes you scratch your head and wonder if he is really a Democrat or Republican and Romney whose key legislation was Romneycare which Obamacare was fashioned after both lost. What the Hell are the Republican elites thinking? Don't they realize that the Independent vote that has surged recently that they so much want to capture are actually former members of the Conservative base that they have shunned for years?

Lutherf said:

There's nothing wrong with a path to citizenship that starts with being here legally. There's a great big problem with a path to citizenship that starts out with "well, you didn't follow the most basic rules but I'm sure you're fine anyway."

Click to expand...

Deuce just wants them to vote Democrat, he couldn't give a flying **** about the people themselves. That's the problem with hacks, they're all politics and nothing else. They want to pass laws that seemingly give themselves a political advantage, and couldn't care less if anyone follows any other law except for when it pertains to some other political issue at the moment. It's 100% about winning politically. When you grow up with parents that are immigrants, you understand exactly what is possible.

Deuce said:

And you want to murder brown people and get away with it, and that's easier if they're an illegal immigrant instead of a legal one.

Since assigning motives to other people is what we're doing here, apparently. Fun game, we should play it more often.

Click to expand...

All you want is their vote.

vesper said:

Last I heard Boehner is planning on being Speaker after the 2014 elections. Are you sure that him retiring isn't just inside-the-Beltway parlor games? Personally Paul Ryan can take a hike. He is such a disappointment to me. And Cantor can go with him. :lol: Maybe it's the wine but at the moment I feel like cleaning House.

Click to expand...

Seems like a decent guy. But i have a hard time not seeing Eddie Muenster every time that rascal shows up on television.....

vesper said:

Luther there is a big push for immigration reform aka amnesty by the Chamber of Commerce. Business wants cheap labor and they want it legally.

Chamber of Commerce 'determined' in push for immigration reform in 2014 - Washington Times

But on the flip side, the Speaker of the House is in real jeopardy of losing his position if he supports such a thing. Hell, Boehner is from my home state and he is already being challenged by other Republicans due to his "compromising" demeanor. I don't see him so willing to "compromise" as Paul Ryan seems to be over this issue.

Buchanan: Boehner Will Lose Speakership if He Pushes for Immigration Reform | National Review Online

My personal opinion is that this issue is dead. It will be met with such a force by most Republicans who know damn well their constituents would never agree to such a thing. Paul Ryan is a Republican elite. He made himself available to be the one who in "bipartisan" agreement to pass the first budget that Obama even agreed not to veto. What does that tell you? He was the ONLY Republican to give Obama a standing O when he talked about immigration during the SOTU address. What does that tell you?

Click to expand...

I used to be a member of the USCOC and they have always been soft on immigration. Then along came TARP and they supported that so I stopped supporting them...until last year. Now they're no longer "soft" on immigration, they're just plain dead wrong. The fact of the matter is that the USCOC has a vested interest in staying relevant in DC and that means Tom Donahue is going to do whatever it takes to stay on the cocktail circuit.

The fallout from from blanket amnesty (that's what this plan is) is going to be more harmful to the labor market than it will be helpful and if the USCOC thinks employers are going to be getting some kind of benefit they're not bothering to look beyond the tip if their nose. The labor market will flood, cost of labor will drop short term, more political pressure will build regarding wage and benefit legislation, cost of labor will skyrocket.

Perotista said:

I suppose the bottom line for me is I could support almost any immigration reform bill as long as it guarantees strict enforcement of our immigration laws once passed and there is no path to citizenship. Any bill has to have those two provisions or I will fight it. My wife is now a naturalized citizen, she came here legally, paid the fees, went through the background checks, obtained a visa, went through all the proper paper work and waiting period, then studied hard and became a naturalized citizen. She did it the right way, if any of these illegals want to become citizens, they too need to do it the right way. It is that simple for me.

Click to expand...

I see any enforcement before legalization provision as amounting to giving the bully 5 dollars if he promises to leave you alone forever. He will leave you alone up until you give him that cookie.Once he has that cookie he can then continue to resume bullying you until you promise him another 5 dollars. Enforcement before legalization is that way too.They will enforce our immigration laws until we grant most of the 12-20 million illegals legal status. They are not going to yank the legal status of illegals just because enforcement provisions have. And instead of 12-20 million illegals we will have around 40-80 million illegals in this country around 30 years from now.

jamesrage said:

I see any enforcement before legalization provision as amounting to giving the bully 5 dollars if he promises to leave you alone forever. He will leave you alone up until you give him that cookie.Once he has that cookie he can then continue to resume bullying you until you promise him another 5 dollars. Enforcement before legalization is that way too.They will enforce our immigration laws until we grant most of the 12-20 million illegals legal status. They are not going to yank the legal status of illegals just because enforcement provisions have. And instead of 12-20 million illegals we will have around 40-80 million illegals in this country around 30 years from now.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it has come to pass. Reagan made 3 million illegals legal. Today we have the same problem but with 12-20 illegals and I will bet if we make these legal come 30 years from now you 40-80 will be a reality.

Any effective immigration reform needs to include an immediate moratorium on all immigration and issuance of work visas and student visas. And if immigration is allowed again after that it must be pegged to the unemployment rate.

Otherwise its just ****ing over Americans.

Here is a very short essay by Pat Buchanan that explains exactly how our country was given away:

How the GOP lost Middle America