Help stop a amnesty threat by John Boehner!

Actually, no it won't because what you do not realize is that you will be the first to try it out.

 

That's fine if hes using it in negotiations but they aren't negotiating at the moment. He can't give in on this and automatically assume the dems will cave on taxes, Obama has specifically stated that he isn't budging on taxes so we will see I guess.

 

When someone does a crime, whether they are a USC, resident alien or illegal alien, I expect them to do the time here. That is what the law says. But I also believe in due process for all and everyone one has a right to a defense, even illegal aliens.

Second, sending money abroad happens. Billions of dollars do go to Mexico, but most, if not all, of that money is to help families there. Isn't the Republican family value system more important than the nationality of where the money goes. And further, tens of billions of dollars also leave the country for various reasons such as foreign direct investment and hiding assets into offshore bank accounts. And keep in mind, the US receives tens of billions of dollars in direct foreign investment. Vutting that flow would be suicide for our econmy.

That was tried in Alabama when a Mercedes Benz manager was caught driving without a license. He had his German license, but not his passport or his drivers license. The cop assumed he was illegal. Turned out he was legal. And it turned out that Alabma was caught in an embarrassing moment where the authors of the bill said that was not the intention of the bill.

Ending birthright citizenship isn't going to end illegal immigration. Coming here to have a kid is not the real reasons why they come. While one is here, either legally or illegally, having children is part of the natural, biological process. Your exampole of a pregnant woman coming here is hyperbolic straw man argument that only comes from the internet where the sources are questionable at best.

 

Where have you been? All experts from both sides of the aisle know that the Dems and the Reps will start negotiating on the budget once Congress gets back on Tuesday. If the Reps do not offer the olive branch, ie comprehensive immigration reform, then they are pretty much screwed for the next two years and the tea party influence will die a quicker death.

 

What I'm saying is that the President has come out and said he will not negotiate on tax breaks for the rich so this olive branch will do no good.

 

Boehner is a smart politician and understands that Latinos are the fastest growing voting bloc in the country. A lot of them oppose abortion and would be voting for Republicans if it weren't for the anti immigrant rhetoric. It stuns me that so many on the right want to drive away voters who are likely to support them.

 

I have to agree. It's time for the republicans to stop hitting themselves and realize the Latino vote is basically conservative.

You can bet the left will use fear and reprisals if they sense this strategy will pay off. Rubio/Rand in '16.

 

Take hikes for those making over $250k is one aspect of the budget, but it is not the only aspect of the budget. Second, the President stated that this is what he thinks the American people voted for when he was reelected. That dos not mean he is dictating with no compromise. That is internet hysterial.

 

You know thats really nice. Helping others. The only thing is our country is in poor status at this time and we can't afford helping others at this time. We need to get our a** in shape for the people that are here legally first. Then look into helping ones from the outside. If we don't we will never get back on our feet.

 

Not true, actually. There is a compromise where Obama and the Democrats can say they raised tax revenue on the rich and Boehner and the Republicans can say they didn't raise taxes, and it's all in eliminating the loopholes and deductions.

That's the deal they are most likely to reach.

 

If we cut our military budget at least 25% and cut all foreign aid, we wouldn't be so poor.

 

The financial problems of this country isn't based on immigration. It is based on overwhelming consumer debt followed by low revenues to meet the basic functions of government.

 

^ This, right here. Never understood why Republicans are so obsessed with immigration.

 

Source: https://www.numbersusa.com/content/...h-back-against-boehners-amnesty-openness.html

Here the Republicans go again. If at first the people don't approve, try, try again.

 

If everyone that wants to come to the United States to become a productive citizen, which addresses well over 95% of those that are classified as undocumented or illegal aliens today, then they would be allowed to come here. This requires a fundamental change in the immigration laws to allow those that want to be law abiding immigrants to come to the United States. It removes the "quota" system which is the root of the problem today that forces many to become undocumented or illegal aliens so the problem is almost completely eliminate.

That doesn't addres those such as drug smugglers that are illegally crossing our borders for criminal purposes. It does eliminate the human trafficers though that are currently smuggling people into the US that often pay $5,000 each to be smuggled into the US. So drug trafficing becomes the major issue but the Border Patrol can effectively deal with this because: 1) only a fraction of the people would be crossing the border illegally, and 2) those crossing the border illegally could be assumed to be doing so for nefarious purposes.

Of course there is another option which would further reduce the problem of illegal activities along our border. End the War on Drugs because it creates the monetary incentive for violating our laws and our border. The War on Drugs is very similiar to the Prohibition Laws of the 1920's-30's because it creates violent criminal activity. It is one of the most ignorant "wars" that the US is waging and it costs hundreds of billions of dollars over time. It also compromises our borders because it creates a huge monetary incentive for illegally crossing the US-Mexican border.

 

This idea that Latinos are a bunch of Mass going Catholics with conserative values is such BS. They are here for the entitlements and will vote for the person who offers them the most entitlements.....just like the blacks (see my signature line below). Most of them come here to birth babies.....who are instant U.S. citizens and thus entitled to the dole. The birth is paid for by Johnny Tax Payer who then begins to pay for the food stamps, health care and bi-lingual education for the kids who will not learn to speak English. They will never vote for a conservative.....the only way they will vote Republican is if the Republicans try to be just like the Dems.....at which time a third party for the white people/producers will be established.

 

Are you serious? So you want to open the borders of the U.S. to anyone who wants to come here......do you realize how many billions of people live on the planet? Do you understand that a majority of those folks would want to come here? Sheer lunacy.......who would pay for all of this?

 

This is reflective of delusional Republican mythology that has never been supported by any facts.

Illegal and undocumented aliens do not come the the United States for welfare or to have children so that the children become US citizens. They come here to work so that they can improve their lives and the lives of their family. They come here for the "American Dream" and have always come here for that reason. They were coming here long before there were any "welfare" benefits for them and their reason for coming has never changed. To my knowledge there has never been any statistical evidence that they've ever come here to have children so that their children would become US citizens. People need to stop believing in political myths.

This is as absurd as the "illegal voter" issues presented by Republicans because statistically the number of "illegal voters" doesn't even come to a small fraction of one percent of voters. After an extensive investigation into voting only 18 cases of illegal votes being cast were found related to well over 100 million votes being cast.

It is also false that Democrats want handouts. They don't. Like all other Americans they want to be successful in their careers and want all Americans to be successful in thier careers. At the same time they recognize that there is a need for assistance by low income individuals that are unable to provide for their personal or family needs. They address the "needs" of the individuals but would far rather see no needs at all. They don't support welfare because its a government handout but instead they support it because it addresses a ligitimate need for many Americans.

Apparently Republicans are taking the position that those in need should be allowed to starve to death and/or live on the streets. Remember that Congress can legislate away the assistance to those in need but Congress cannot legislate away the need. How about something for Republicans to digest.

A large percentage of those receiving food stamps today need that assistance because they're too old to work and are on Social Security. Social Security, with average benefits of only $13,000/yr, doesn't provide enough income to these individuals to keep food on the table and a roof over their head. If Republicans want to end the food stamps for these individuals they can vote to increase the Social Security benefits so that "granny" doesn't require food stamps. Of course they need to increase taxes to pay for this but it is a solution. Or they can throw granny under the bus. Today they seem to advocate throwing granny under the bus. And they wonder why they lack support from so many Americans?

A fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats today is that the Democrats are calling on the wealthy that can afford to pay more taxes to take a bigger role in supporting our government to balance the budget. Republicans advocate cutting off expendatures to the poor so that the budget can be balanced by throwing granny and single working women with children (the two largest groups of those collecting welfare) under the bus. They call upon those least able to afford to balance the budget to balance the budget. And they wonder why so many Americans, including Libertarians, are opposed to their agenda.

FYI Libertarians support addressing the poverty by removing barriers to individuals improving their financial circumstances (e.g end state licensing for business so that anyone can start a business without a license expecially "trade" licenses) so that the need is eliminated. We don't propose that those in need should simply be thrown under the bus which is what many "tea party" Republicans are advocating.

 

Of course any fix to the illegal immigration problem involves a fairly comprehensive amnesty. The best method would probably be a program of a tightened border AND a work permit program AND a real crackdown on the employers of illegals AND a comprehensive amnesty. We shouldn't have a comprehensive amnesty unless we implement it as part of a comprehensive solution.

 

The people coming here, actually, since they would be paying taxes. We'd generate more revenue and maybe even cause other nations to change the way they govern so they stop losing people to govern.

 

Lol, by trying to appease everybody else republicans will lose their base...... This is truly downfall of repubs

 

The problem is that the Republican base is already diminshing. Minorities are becoming the majority. The old white rural voters that were generally Republican are dying. High population centers are moving towards the Democrats because the Democrats address the problems these people face.

If the Republicans don't start addressing the needs of the poor and of the minorities then they will fail over time. The writing is already on the wall.

 

That's what we've effectively done anyway. The Simpson-Mazzoli bill amnestied almost 3 million people in the 1980's. Those people are by now mostly voting citizens, and their children definitely are. That's another couple of million. And what is the political culture that they've learned and grown up in? You are rewarded for breaking the law. Another amnesty now would mean that the US has effectively had no immigration policy since the Eisenhower administration. That adds up to a population of 10s of millions of people who think the law is a joke and you only benefit by breaking the law. That's will be the new political culture.

 

For democrats it's obvious. They are the bread and circuses party. The more poor, uneducated, have-nots the more votes.

 

Saint Ronnie did because he thought a one time amnesty would be a good trade to get the borders secure. Like deals on on spending cuts for tax increases, the Dems backtracked on this deal too, that's why we are almost 20 years from the last amnesty and we still don't have secure borders. At this point, another amnesty means that we effectively don't have any immigration policy. If you dems just want open borders, with no restrictions, why don't you just say so?