I don't believe most politicians care about what it will cost United States citizens. The only pockets they care about is filling their own so why would they care what making illegals legal would cost this country. They steal as much of taxpayers money as they can also so we the people get the finger from most politicians these days. All I can say is thank goodness for men like Mike Lee Rand Paul and Ted Cruz and a very few others. They are our only hope.
Here we go again.
I need to resign myself to the fact we won't get the Senate and may lose the House....Boehner needs to go!..I swear they don't want to win either House...
Yep and it's getting old........ us against them really wears you down and this is what the Chamber Republicans are counting on.
I need to resign myself to the fact we won't get the Senate and may lose the House....Boehner needs to go!..I swear they don't want to win either House...
I don't believe most politicians care about what it will cost United States citizens. The only pockets they care about is filling their own so why would they care what making illegals legal would cost this country. They steal as much of taxpayers money as they can also so we the people get the finger from most politicians these days. All I can say is thank goodness for men like Mike Lee Rand Paul and Ted Cruz and a very few others. They are our only hope.
All they want to do is line their pockets.
House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) and Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R., Va.) both included an immigration rewrite among the top 2014 priorities they outlined during a closed-door meeting with the GOP ranks, lawmakers said after the gathering.
Mr. Boehner told Republicans on Wednesday that he expected to release a set of GOP principles in the coming weeks. The speaker had announced in November that Republicans, including House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R., Va.), planned to draft the guidelines before bringing any immigration bills to the House floor.
Although many House Republicans have been wary of changing immigration laws, GOP leaders have consistently maintained they plan to tackle the topic in their own fashion.
Mr. Boehner told lawmakers Wednesday that “‘This is an issue we have to deal with and I continue to believe that,’” said Rep. Matt Salmon (R., Ariz.). [WSJ]
The president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce vowed Wednesday that 2014 will be the year his organization pulls “out all of the stops” to pass immigration reform, pledging that the Chamber will turn the 2014 midterm elections “into a motivation for change.”We’ve made this point a number of times, but it’s worth repeating. Why would Republicans be in a hell-fire rush to pass immigration legislation when they have so little political power? These are the same folks who suggest that we can’t even block bad things with control of just the U.S. House, even though the House is vested with control over the purse strings. Why would they think we can pass new immigration legislation built on conservative principles if it requires the cooperation of all three branches? Why in the world would Republicans reward Obama’s malevolence and disregard for our immigration laws by granting him his biggest second-term agenda item? Why not wait until Republicans control the White House, and we can trust the president to faithfully execute the enforcement first, thereby precluding another 1986-style disaster?
“We’re determined to make 2014 the year that immigration reform is finally enacted,” Donohue said at his 2014 State of American Business address. “The Chamber will pull out all the stops – through grassroots lobbying, communications, politics and partnerships with unions, faith organization, law enforcement and other – to get it done.”
Donohue refuted the idea that immigration reform would not pass in 2014, a midterm election year when very little, if anything, gets done on Capitol Hill.
“We hope to turn that assumption on its ear,” he said. “It’s based on a simple theory: If you can’t make them see the light, then at least make them feel some heat.” [CNN]
And speaking of the special interests, the Chamber is promising to reward those who support their views and punish those who oppose amnesty. Accordingly, in light of their large media buy in support of Senator McConnell, has anyone asked the Minority Leader about his plans for immigration? Will he support the push in 2014?
I need to resign myself to the fact we won't get the Senate and may lose the House....Boehner needs to go!..I swear they don't want to win either House...I was first attracted to conservatism by its unbridled optimism for the American spirit.
There has long been a saying as go California so goes the nation. So.....in that reagard let's take a little look back in history at California... Until the Simson-Mazzoli amnesty of 1986 California normally went Republican in it's elections - especially Presidential elections. In addition, the Republican Party held the California state house for 72 years. Today, post the 1986 Amnesty, California is as blue as blue can be and the California Republican Party is deader than a door nail.
[quote It states that “criminal aliens, gang members, and sex offenders and those who do not meet the above requirements” won’t qualify for legalization.
Amnesty will attract even more criminals here illegally than we can imagine. Ann Coulter is right, the GOP is on a suicide march.
I was first attracted to conservatism by its unbridled optimism for the American spirit.
"I've spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don't know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still." - Reagan's farewell address
There has long been a saying as go California so goes the nation. So.....in that reagard let's take a little look back in history at California... Until the Simson-Mazzoli amnesty of 1986 California normally went Republican in it's elections - especially Presidential elections. In addition, the Republican Party held the California state house for 72 years. Today, post the 1986 Amnesty, California is as blue as blue can be and the California Republican Party is deader than a door nail.Try this. Ten cities with lowest crime in America. You'll like that Scottsdale AZ is on it.
Try this. Ten cities with lowest crime in America. You'll like that Scottsdale AZ is on it.
But you will not like that 5 of the 10 are in California.
http://www.areavibes.com/library/10-cities-lowest-crime/
This criteria is places over 200,000. Years back, with a lower population criteria, Irvine CA and Huntington Beach CA went back and forth, for lowest crime rankings.
Try this. Ten cities with lowest crime in America. You'll like that Scottsdale AZ is on it.
But you will not like that 5 of the 10 are in California.
http://www.areavibes.com/library/10-cities-lowest-crime/
This criteria is places over 200,000. Years back, with a lower population criteria, Irvine CA and Huntington Beach CA went back and forth, for lowest crime rankings.
and this has what to do with amnesty? and I am more than familiar with Irvine having lived AND worked there... but your post has absolutely nothing to do with the subject - as usual.It has everything to do with it, since you are suggesting California is already down the toilet with too many Hispanics in our midst, and the rest of the country is headed there, too.
There are some very affluent areas remaining in California, and they have low crime rates. However, they are hardly representative of Mexifornia as a whole."Mexifornia as a whole.."
It has everything to do with it, since you are suggesting California is already down the toilet with too many Hispanics in our midst, and the rest of the country is headed there, too.
Having lived and worked and been familiar with Irvine CA, you KNOW (or should know) it is not down the toilet, too.
You think posts are not relevant to topics, if you disagree with them.
Mexico always said they wanted their land back. Son of a gun, if they haven't done it through the ballot box. Not a shot fired.
I realize that makes me sound xenophobic. But I'm not. I love the Mexican culture.
But, you see, Mexicans that are here illegally are not exactly coming here waving Red, White and Blue flags hopped up on becoming Americans. They came for the easy access to work. That's a different type of immigrant then those in the world that have traditionally come here legally.
Same here, AC. My best friend was born in Mexico, her family came here legally. All speak English, assimilated, went to college, have successful careers or businesses and her parents are amazing people, I adore her father, such a gentleman... but the key here is a) came here legally, b) learned and speak English, c) got educated and the bad part d) they all voted for Obama.
Yep. As Ann Coulter points out in surveys, a high percentage will vote Democrat. We're losing our Constitution. That's a likely outcome that's closely tied to the immigration issue. That should concern all of us that love liberty and despise communism. We're losing our country for our children.
I realize that makes me sound xenophobic. But I'm not. I love the Mexican culture.
But, you see, Mexicans that are here illegally are not exactly coming here waving Red, White and Blue flags hopped up on becoming Americans. They came for the easy access to work. That's a different type of immigrant then those in the world that have traditionally come here legally.
I realize that makes me sound xenophobic. But I'm not. I love the Mexican culture.
But, you see, Mexicans that are here illegally are not exactly coming here waving Red, White and Blue flags hopped up on becoming Americans.
They came for the easy access to work.
That's a different type of immigrant then those in the world that have traditionally come here legally.
It never crossed my mind Aligncare.
You'd be suprised. Many of them are very happy in America and want to stay.
Well we could agree on "easier access to work."
Really. In the early 1900's The polacks invaded WI. They came without papers to work the mines and saw mills and stayed in their own little Poland communities. Many never learning English except a few phrases. Their children learned English in their community school. How are the Mexicans different?
The "Pollacks" were not here illegally.
You and I rarely agree on much of anything, but on these points we are in complete agreement.
The "Pollacks" were not here illegally.Neither were the slaves. If the problem with illegals is only the change of immigration laws then the simple solution is to change the law.
and this has what to do with amnesty? and I am more than familiar with Irvine having lived AND worked there... but your post has absolutely nothing to do with the subject - as usual.
My parents came to the US in 1956 with me in tow. Mom's family came here either before us or after us, but all came legally.My wife's mother from Italy came here with an arranged marriage to a native born American citizen, in 1946-47. He was born in Los Angeles to Italian immigrants that came here separately and married.
We lived in an Italian neighborhood in Brooklyn. My neighborhood friends' families were documented.
I guess I have a "distorted" view of what it means to be an immigrant.
He was trained as a lawyer in Italy. BTW why did he want to leave Italy? Because he was drafted into the Italian army, taken POW, escaped.
My wife's mother from Italy came here with an arranged marriage to a native born American citizen, in 1946-47. He was born in Los Angeles to Italian immigrants that came here separately and married.Thank goodness your family found the loopholes in the immigration laws of the time. No doubt the rich culture of your family has enhanced the way you color your reality, and one of the reasons why I find your posts so solidly balancing logic and humanity.
My mother in law's brother, came to North America, entered the US on tourist visas to see his sister, met a woman, and eventually found a way to enter and stay, legally. During his time, he went to Mexico, to Venezuela, and eventually learned that if he went to Cuba, he could enter the US and stay, legally.
He married the woman, who became a doctor, and lived out their days, as proud American citizens.
He was trained as a lawyer in Italy. BTW why did he want to leave Italy? Because he was drafted into the Italian army, taken POW, escaped.
While you're fawning over his logic, ask him what city crime rates have to do with amnesty.I know why he mentioned crime rates. It is not my job to educate you.
Why am I not surprised? :silly:synaptic resistance.
Big difference between this and Mexicans sneaking across our border to have a anchor baby and collect welfare benefits and work as servant for cash under the table.I heard his full story for the first time when his son in law spoke at his memorial service. It was about the man's pride to be an American, who did it the legal way.
Big difference between this and Mexicans sneaking across our border to have a anchor baby and collect welfare benefits and work as servant for cash under the table.Or Chinese, or Vietnamese, or Filipinos, or Russians, or Canadians.
Or Chinese, or Vietnamese, or Filipinos, or Russians, or Canadians.
The prosperity of America and western democracies in Europe, Canada, Australia are likewise magnets for immigration, legal and illegal.
My most recent immigrant ancestor came in 1871, before Ellis Island. I have no knowledge of the laws of the time, his "legality," etc. He was a scoundrel, though, of the "dumb swede" variety.
Prior to that great year 1913 (the year in which we got the federal reserve, direct election of U.S. senators, and the income tax) anyone who wanted to could get on a boat and come here. They we welcomed to come and make it in the land of opportunity but got nothing from the state to aid them in their efforts beyond that blessing! That's the difference!
The primary problem with illegal immigration and even our legal immigration process is that it is not good for America. The immigration process should be a positive benefit for America and all of its citizens. Therefore, the immigration process should assist educated or wealthy individuals to our country, as that is good for America.
Instead, the legal and illegal immigration system we have permits millions of low income, uneducated peoples to enter, most often from inferior cultures, cultures that do not share traditional American values of honesty, education, law, or Christian civilization. Since America is now a welfare state, this immigration system is a prescription for disaster. While many may come to America to work, it is too easy now to for these individuals or their progeny to join the welfare class. To this end, the system benefits certain businesses and the democrat party. It benefits the immigrants. But, overall, it is a plague on the rest of America.
Right at the heart of the issue... we are not anti immigrants, just want people who cone here to add to our society, not take from it.
Perhaps it's time to END immigration for a while -- ALL of it.
Time to hang out the "no vacancy" sign for a while, and let those here be assimilated, if that's even possible any more.
This place is full up for now. We don't need any more. Not even the legal ones.
We've progressed. There is a new enlightenment in America. The inscription on the Statue of Liberty should be edited to read, "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to collect free government benefits ..."
One could make a very strong case in support of the argument that we have an illegal immigration problem because we have a runaway entitlement problem.
One could make a very strong case in support of the argument that we have an illegal immigration problem because we have a runaway entitlement problem.
I'm not so sure about that; how many poor peasants in Mexico sit around discussing whether they should pay thousands to a coyote to get them across the Rio Grande, just so they can start collecting welfare benefits in Illinois?
Do many of them get trapped in that system, and end up living off the entitlement system? Probably. Do they come here for that in the first place? Probably not.
That is damning evidence, Rapunzel. While Americans struggle to put a roof over their head and shoes on their kids' feet, our tax dollars are being used to lure economic migrants here to take jobs and vote Democrat!
That is damning evidence, Rapunzel. While Americans struggle to put a roof over their head and shoes on their kids' feet, our tax dollars are being used to lure economic migrants here to take jobs and vote Democrat!
That is damning evidence, Rapunzel. While Americans struggle to put a roof over their head and shoes on their kids' feet, our tax dollars are being used to lure economic migrants here to take jobs and vote Democrat!According to the article, it was going on during the Bush administration in 2006.
According to the article, it was going on during the Bush administration in 2006.
From article
"As far back as 2006, in its Corruption Chronicles blog, Judicial Watch revealed that the USDA was spending taxpayer money to run Spanish-language television ads encouraging illegal immigrants to apply for government-financed food stamps. The Mexican Consul in Santa Ana, CA, at the time even starred in some of the U.S. Government-financed television commercials, which explained the program and provided a phone number to apply. In the widely viewed commercial the Consul assured that receiving food stamps “won’t affect your immigration status.”"
According to the article, it was going on during the Bush administration in 2006.
From article
"As far back as 2006, in its Corruption Chronicles blog, Judicial Watch revealed that the USDA was spending taxpayer money to run Spanish-language television ads encouraging illegal immigrants to apply for government-financed food stamps. The Mexican Consul in Santa Ana, CA, at the time even starred in some of the U.S. Government-financed television commercials, which explained the program and provided a phone number to apply. In the widely viewed commercial the Consul assured that receiving food stamps “won’t affect your immigration status.”"
According to the article, it was going on during the Bush administration in 2006.
From article
"As far back as 2006, in its Corruption Chronicles blog, Judicial Watch revealed that the USDA was spending taxpayer money to run Spanish-language television ads encouraging illegal immigrants to apply for government-financed food stamps. The Mexican Consul in Santa Ana, CA, at the time even starred in some of the U.S. Government-financed television commercials, which explained the program and provided a phone number to apply. In the widely viewed commercial the Consul assured that receiving food stamps “won’t affect your immigration status.”"