• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

In 84-15 vote, Senate moves forward on immigration reform

Say it louder and maybe somebody will think this actually rebuts the facts I posted.

Most illegals work in big industries (and they work hard) and big industries exploit them. Hell, they can violate all the worker protection laws and get away with it, since illegal immigrants can't complain. Statistic indicate that employers of illegal immigrants frequently fire them and don't pay the wages due them, as just an example. They also simply violate overtime and MW rules.

Not only that, they can suppress the wages of American workers by tapping a work force of people who think subminimum wage is decent pay. A perfect conservative work world.

And what has the GOP done about it: thrown those CEOs in jail? No, they built fences and attacked the immigrants, not the companies that exploited them.

Now, give us some more of your discredited rightwing memes.

Oh please show us some facts. Why don't you post the dictionary definition, maybe you'll learn something. The difference between me and you is I actually know something about immigrants, because I grew with them all my life. You're just a mouthfoamer who spouts off leftwing talking points he reads on Democratic Underground and other retarded sites.
 
My post you responded to had more to do with liberal political correct policies on how the State Department issues student visas, tourist visas and refugee visas.

But I digress, you want to talk about "brown people."

Those "hard working brown people"? You also noticed how those "brown people" can take a simple task such as cleaning a toilet or cutting a lawn and turn it in to hard work. For over 200 years nobody been able to figure it out.

I have no idea who's "superior cuisine" your referring too ? But any food that requires a lot of spices including jalapenos to mask the taste so you can get it down your esophagus isn't a cuisine. If it were, we wouldn't have needed to carry a bottle of Tabasco sauce in Vietnam when we had to eat C-Rats out in the bush.

We have liftoff! The racist gene is always just waiting to be expressed if you give the conservative specimen the right conditions.

Thanks for sharing that.
 
Most illegals work in big industries (and they work hard) and big industries exploit them. .

Doing some quick useless research, I found that most big industries in America don't employ "hard working," unskilled "illegals." All of those unskilled jobs have all ready been shipped over seas.

Now if cleaning toilets is classified as a "big industry," you might have some credibility. As Antonio Villaragrosa, the spoke hole for the Democrat National Convention proudly said. "We clean your toilets."
And he lied, I'm still waiting.
 
roger simon's professional leftists and journolisters today:

On immigration, hurry up and wait - Carrie Budoff Brown and Seung Min Kim - POLITICO.com

The Senate finished its first week of debate Thursday on a massive immigration reform bill — with almost nothing to show for it.

Senators delivered hours of speeches and filed dozens of amendments. But they never figured out a way to begin casting votes on all of those proposed changes.

The most anticipated policy fight in years got off to a slow start because Democrats and Republicans deadlocked over process.

The lack of any serious progress this week means that the Senate will need to make up for it over the next two weeks, raising the likelihood of weekend voting sessions and a late rush to finish the bill before the July 4 recess.

The risk of delay is that unless the voting starts soon, senators who have been waiting months to get a chance to shape the legislation can argue they’ve been cut out the process and potentially oppose the bill because they’re not securing changes they need.

It’s possible Reid can move to table — or kill — amendments as he did Thursday with a border security proposal sponsored by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). But there’s a peril to that: Proponents want to make modifications to appease concerns of fence-sitting senators not simply to keep the bill intact.

“We are going to finish this bill before the July 4 recess,” Reid scolded. “Everyone should understand that. Everyone has had adequate warning, notice that we’re going to work next weekend [June 22]. That means Friday, Monday, and that includes Saturday and Sunday to get this legislation done.”

And Republican senators spent the week working privately on a border security amendment that would satisfy swing votes in their party without pushing away Democrats. They are searching for an alternative to a proposal from Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) that has emerged as the choice of conservatives but is unacceptable to the Gang of Eight.

“We’re working on other border security measures that can be supported by both people who support a path to citizenship and people who want further border security,” Schumer said. “I’m optimistic we could find something.”

does that compromise alternative to cornyn even exist?

schumer's optimistic

stay tuned
 
OK, I'm confused on something. This was voted for and then tabled. It is now part of the bill, not subject to change, right?
6/11/2013:
S.AMDT.1195 Amendment SA 1195 proposed by Senator Grassley. (consideration: CR S4197-4206; text: CR S4197-4198)
To prohibit the granting of registered provisional immigrant status until the Secretary has maintained effective control of the borders for 6 months.
 
I think Janet Nap already said the border was secure. If you are leaving it up to the secretary of whatever then why bother putting it in words. I heard the
status of "illegal" does not apply to people in school, people on unemployment, people over 60, mothers, fathers, and perhaps some guy breathing?


OK, I'm confused on something. This was voted for and then tabled. It is now part of the bill, not subject to change, right?
 
I think Janet Nap already said the border was secure. If you are leaving it up to the secretary of whatever then why bother putting it in words. I heard the
status of "illegal" does not apply to people in school, people on unemployment, people over 60, mothers, fathers, and perhaps some guy breathing?

It would be good to see the text of that.

What I read doesn't say it was up to the secretary, but if it is, then it is pointless.
 
grassley went down on the floor 43 to 57, failed in leahy's judiciary committee as well, 6 to 12, as gangster 8's graham and flake went with legalization first

Senate rejects border security plan - Seung Min Kim and Burgess Everett - POLITICO.com

grassley (iowa) demanded the border be secured first for 6 months before pathways could be laid

dems pryor, arkansas, and manchin, WV, came grassley's way

grassley woulda set "a much higher bar" than cornyn, who calls for "triggers" on the border before green cards go out

watch schumer, the friendlier lib (as opposed to progressive pugilists reid and his whip durbin)

chuckie is looking for that middle way (between leahy, say, and cornyn) which probably doesn't exist

if schumer (the most powerful man in the senate, whose baby this bill is) adopts cornyn, the bill will pass

if not...

stay tuned
 
Independents favor security before a path by a two-to-one margin, and Republicans support it by a three-to-one margin. Democrats favored a path to citizenship over security, but by the barest of margins, 50 percent to 49 percent. Overall, CNN found that 62 percent of the public favors prioritizing security before a path to citizenship, while 36 percent favored a path over security.

Support falling in polls, Harry Reid announces rush to pass immigration bill | WashingtonExaminer.com
 
today:

Congressional Republicans, who have been more receptive to immigration reform since last November, now appear increasingly unlikely to widely back the Senate immigration bill unless they can extract significant concessions from Democrats.

It all comes down to the battle over border security. Some Senate Republicans are coalescing around a new border security plan as an alternative to Texas Republican Sen. John Cornyn’s, demanding acceptance of it as a condition for their support of the overall bill. But top Democrats are balking at initial drafts of their proposal and privately concede there’s little chance the Senate will add even tougher border security language to the bipartisan bill.

Failing to win significant GOP support in the Senate could imperil the bill’s chances in the House, where Republicans are already scoffing at the Senate measure. House Speaker John Boehner is vowing to put a bill on the floor only if it can win support from a Republican majority. Rather than advancing a comprehensive bill, as Democrats demand, a House committee began work Tuesday on an enforcement-only measure mainly backed by Republicans.

GOP support on immigration dissipating - Manu Raju and Carrie Budoff Brown - POLITICO.com

yesterday: cnn finds that 62% (of adults, as apposed to rv's or lv's) believe that border security should be the "main focus" vs 36% who want legalization prioritized

CNN Poll: Border Security First

obama's approval on handling immigration reform is 40-56

stay tuned
 
Back
Top Bottom