Meet The Press Todd Grills Cruz on Immigration, Never Gets an Answer

[DCPatriot]

Once-Ler said:

A new law needs to authorize more fencing.  And Obama gets to VETO it until 2017.

Maybe we should started building a fence up north and start securing the coasts as long as we are soo freaking rich.

You'd think that with the negative publicity over the San Francisco  (illegal alien deported FIVE times) murder and policies of Democratic controlled Sanctuary Cities that enough DEMS facing reelection would step up and override any Obama veto.



....you'd think.   

[aligncare]

I'm tougher on immigration than anyone I've heard here.

I even think there should be a moratorium on legal immigration to give time for assimilation of groups already here. That's been the history of U.S. immigration policies in the past.

But, whatever policy we settle on it should be based on the needs of legal citizens and residents, not left up to the capricious self-importation of anyone within walking distance of the border.

[MACVSOG68]

Yeah! And all those many other things you mention came AFTER we legalized (granted amnesty to) those already in the country!

NO! Thank you!

Well, no.  Did you ever actually read the 2007 bill?  All of those things and more had to be certified as completed first.  And amnesty applies to a group.  The dictionary defines it as a general pardon for offenses, especially political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.  What Carter did with the draft dodgers was amnesty.  What Obama is effectively doing today is amnesty.

In the earlier legislation, each illegal would have to apply, get backgrounded for criminal activity, pay a series of fines and penalties, and then get in the back of the line.  Several other requirements were to be placed on him to qualify and during the term until his green card is issued.  In the US, 97% of federal and 94% of state cases are plea bargained down.  Yet it seems almost akin to treason for some if we do the same with even one illegal.

Considering how many borders we illegally crossed in creating this great Nation, I wonder now at the level of vitriol over others who want to come here.  It's about something, but not principle.

[MACVSOG68]

I'm tougher on immigration than anyone I've heard here.

I even think there should be a moratorium on legal immigration to give time for assimilation of groups already here. That's been the history of U.S. immigration policies in the past.

But, whatever policy we settle on it should be based on the needs of legal citizens and residents, not left up to the capricious self-importation of anyone within walking distance of the border.

Not sure how much tougher you can get than landmines and shoot on sight orders.  But to your last point, the 2007 legislation ended chain migration, ended the diversity lottery, and created an immigration plan based on the needs for various skill sets and education.  It completely rewrote the immigration laws. 

But that was eight years ago.  We're so much better off today without those laws. 

[Bigun]

Well, no.  Did you ever actually read the 2007 bill?  All of those things and more had to be certified as completed first.  And amnesty applies to a group.  The dictionary defines it as a general pardon for offenses, especially political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.  What Carter did with the draft dodgers was amnesty.  What Obama is effectively doing today is amnesty.

In the earlier legislation, each illegal would have to apply, get backgrounded for criminal activity, pay a series of fines and penalties, and then get in the back of the line.  Several other requirements were to be placed on him to qualify and during the term until his green card is issued.  In the US, 97% of federal and 94% of state cases are plea bargained down.  Yet it seems almost akin to treason for some if we do the same with even one illegal.

Considering how many borders we illegally crossed in creating this great Nation, I wonder now at the level of vitriol over others who want to come here.  It's about something, but not principle.

And the DEMOCRATS killed it!  They are after ONE thing and one thing only! NEW voters and if they can't have those they are not interested PERIOD!

And I do agree with you that what Obama is doing is amnesty! He is doing it ILLEGALLY which is why his HHS man is soon to find himself in front of a federal judge trying to explain WHY he has ignored the judges order in the case!

[libertybele]

And the DEMOCRATS killed it!  They are after ONE thing and one thing only! NEW voters and if they can't have those they are not interested PERIOD!

And I do agree with you that what Obama is doing is amnesty! He is doing it ILLEGALLY which is why his HHS man is soon to find himself in front of a federal judge trying to explain WHY he has ignored the judges order in the case!

Exactly.  The DEMS won't nothing more than new voters.  They could care less about the illegal immigration issue otherwise.

[MACVSOG68]

And the DEMOCRATS killed it!  They are after ONE thing and one thing only! NEW voters and if they can't have those they are not interested PERIOD!

And I do agree with you that what Obama is doing is amnesty! He is doing it ILLEGALLY which is why his HHS man is soon to find himself in front of a federal judge trying to explain WHY he has ignored the judges order in the case!

Umm no, the Democrats didn't kill it; Reid introduced it twice and a GOP filibuster killed it twice.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Umm no, the Democrats didn't kill it; Reid introduced it twice and a GOP filibuster killed it twice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qj9L5U7csg

[MACVSOG68]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Qj9L5U7csg

Good description of where we are today.

[aligncare]

Not sure how much tougher you can get than landmines and shoot on sight orders.  But to your last point, the 2007 legislation ended chain migration, ended the diversity lottery, and created an immigration plan based on the needs for various skill sets and education.  It completely rewrote the immigration laws. 

But that was eight years ago.  We're so much better off today without those laws. 

Yes, if one takes landmines and shoot on sight orders seriously, then, yes, an immigration moratorium is just fluff.  So, let's just do it. (Uh, meaning moratoriums – not land mines.)

[Luis Gonzalez]

Yes, if one takes landmines and shoot on sight orders seriously, then, yes, an immigration moratorium is just fluff.  So, let's just do it. (Uh, meaning moratoriums – not land mines.)

There are very few, if any, complex problems where sledgehammer solutions are a good idea. A moratorium on all immigration, stopping the best and brightest from coming here in order to stop the wretched refuse of the near-by teeming shores, is not in the best interest of the nation. We need to think instead of emoting. Most people stopped thinking on this issue long ago and are now just running on emotions.

Memes and slogans do not make for good policy, but unfortunately that's what's been pushing this issue for many years.

Even history is being rewritten in order to sustain long-held positions on the issue.

"Control" does not mean "stop". My faucet can either be on or off, but I control the flow between the two options with a simple movement of the handle.

We need to control immigration better. That means the borders, that means the legal entries, that means the visitor and student visas, and that means finding a way for labor to enter the country legally, work here, then go home with the reasonable expectation that they will be allowed back in when there's work available again.

[truth_seeker]

Sites like this one and the Fresno one, thrive on "emoting." Like negative emoting is better than no emoting at all.

Like the news "If it bleeds it leads."

[Dexter]

There are very few, if any, complex problems where sledgehammer solutions are a good idea.

Indeed.

[Free Vulcan]

Most of that and more was in the 2007 legislation.  The 2013 bill was almost as good.

And some complain that the GOP killed it, but the Dems set it up to be killed to blame the GOP.

[Carling]

Once-Ler said:
 

You'd think that with the negative publicity over the San Francisco  (illegal alien deported FIVE times) murder and policies of Democratic controlled Sanctuary Cities that enough DEMS facing reelection would step up and override any Obama veto.

What negative publicity.  The President ignored it, as did his media.  That's the way it is.

[MACVSOG68]

And some complain that the GOP killed it, but the Dems set it up to be killed to blame the GOP.

How did they do that?  It was actually a bipartisan bill.

[Free Vulcan]

How did they do that?  It was actually a bipartisan bill.

They threw in enough garbage to make the GOP balk. Hell, even the unions and LULAC balked.

[MACVSOG68]

They threw in enough garbage to make the GOP balk. Hell, even the unions and LULAC balked.

The only thing the GOP balked at was the legalization plan, which required the border security, biometric id cards and employer enforcement to be certified first.  And it included fines and penalties, getting in the back of the line, no serious criminal history, no gang activity, jobs, no welfare, English proficiency, no chain migration, no more diversity lottery, and more. 

The GOP (part of it) simply wouldn't go along with any legalization.  And it was what Reid hoped for as he really didn't want anything that favorable to the other side.  He won that one twice, and we as a Nation are so much better off today as Obama has basically provided amnesty without having to give up all of those things unfavorable to the left.

[Formerly Once-Ler]

The only thing the GOP balked at was the legalization plan, which required the border security, biometric id cards and employer enforcement to be certified first.  And it included fines and penalties, getting in the back of the line, no serious criminal history, no gang activity, jobs, no welfare, English proficiency, no chain migration, no more diversity lottery, and more. 

The GOP (part of it) simply wouldn't go along with any legalization.  And it was what Reid hoped for as he really didn't want anything that favorable to the other side.  He won that one twice, and we as a Nation are so much better off today as Obama has basically provided amnesty without having to give up all of those things unfavorable to the left.

That is my recollection as well.  As I recall the bill passed both chambers of Congress but it was the pedophile Speaker, of the Republican controlled House, who refused to appoint a conference committee.

[MACVSOG68]

That is my recollection as well.  As I recall the bill passed both chambers of Congress but it was the pedophile Speaker, of the Republican controlled House, who refused to appoint a conference committee.

That was the 2006 legislation.  The House had nothing but enforcement and security; the Senate also dealt with those already here.  The Speaker would not appoint a conference committee.  The 2007 legislation came under a Dem Majority Leader, Reid, after McCain and Kennedy put together the bill I'm referring to that had something for everybody in it.  After failing a vote to end debate, Reid reintroduced it yet again, and again it failed.

Then in 2013 the Senate passed yet another immigration reform bill.  But rather than take up the Senate Bill, a House Democrat introduced H.R. 15 which did address comprehensive immigration reform.  While it had 200 cosponsors, it failed a discharge petition to move it out of committee.

[Luis Gonzalez]

That was the 2006 legislation.  The House had nothing but enforcement and security; the Senate also dealt with those already here.  The Speaker would not appoint a conference committee.  The 2007 legislation came under a Dem Majority Leader, Reid, after McCain and Kennedy put together the bill I'm referring to that had something for everybody in it.  After failing a vote to end debate, Reid reintroduced it yet again, and again it failed.

Then in 2013 the Senate passed yet another immigration reform bill.  But rather than take up the Senate Bill, a House Democrat introduced H.R. 15 which did address comprehensive immigration reform.  While it had 200 cosponsors, it failed a discharge petition to move it out of committee.

Problems are far more profitable and useful than solutions.

Politically speaking.

[MACVSOG68]

Problems are far more profitable and useful than solutions.

Politically speaking.

Tru dat

[Formerly Once-Ler]

That was the 2006 legislation. 

Thank you for correcting me.

[MACVSOG68]

Thank you for correcting me.

I knew you meant that.