Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Rubio and bipartisan immigration bill


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,062
  • Reputation: 458
HUDDLER

Posted 28 January 2013 - 11:13 AM

http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=18330912

Doing what Obama couldn't.

#2 Kurb

Kurb

    I hit it.

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 13,702
  • Reputation: 4,443
  • LocationILM
Administrators

Posted 28 January 2013 - 11:24 AM

I like what I hear from Rubio.

#3 NanceUSMC

NanceUSMC

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 29-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 1,155
  • Reputation: 513
HUDDLER

Posted 28 January 2013 - 11:38 AM

I like what I hear from Rubio.



Same here...

#4 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,711
  • Reputation: 2,351
Moderators

Posted 28 January 2013 - 12:22 PM

Interesting on first pass. Without numbers behind it, it's basically all puppies, unicorns, and rainbows.

#5 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,711
  • Reputation: 2,351
Moderators

Posted 28 January 2013 - 04:21 PM

Re-reading this, there are some serious red flags/ambiguities.

Creating a Path to Citizenship for Unauthorized Immigrants Already Here that is Contingent Upon Securing the Border and Combating Visa Overstays


Contingent upon? Contingent upon what exactly? And who decides this?

Give me numbers, definitions, exact goals. This kind of vagueness points to no good.

#6 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • Joined: 25-November 08
  • posts: 24,381
  • Reputation: 2,333
SUPPORTER

Posted 28 January 2013 - 04:33 PM

And while border security has improved significantly over the last two Administrations


But but Obummer and his illegal voters!

#7 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,062
  • Reputation: 458
HUDDLER

Posted 29 January 2013 - 09:29 AM

Contingent means...border security comes first

#8 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,062
  • Reputation: 458
HUDDLER

Posted 29 January 2013 - 09:42 AM

So of course the entire bill is bad if the immigration plan is contingent on border security.

I mean...what kind of moron stops the flooding before figuring out how redirect the water already busted through. Pffssh.

Way to tow the line Delhommey.

#9 Davidson Deac II

Davidson Deac II

    Senior Member

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,924
  • Reputation: 1,458
HUDDLER

Posted 29 January 2013 - 10:39 AM

Contingent means...border security comes first

But defining border security is the hard part. We can increase the numbers of Border patrol agents, but that might not make a significant dent in the numbers of illegals crossing. Truth is that we could put 2-3 divisions of army troops along the border (40-60 thousand troops), and there would still be holes in security. Its a very long border.

If its contingent on adding 5000 new border patrol agents and building some fences, then fine, do it and proceed. But understand that may not achieve the desired effect. If its contingent on actual cuts in the numbers of illegal aliens, then we may never get past the contingent part.

#10 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,062
  • Reputation: 458
HUDDLER

Posted 29 January 2013 - 11:07 AM

But defining border security is the hard part. We can increase the numbers of Border patrol agents, but that might not make a significant dent in the numbers of illegals crossing. Truth is that we could put 2-3 divisions of army troops along the border (40-60 thousand troops), and there would still be holes in security. Its a very long border.

If its contingent on adding 5000 new border patrol agents and building some fences, then fine, do it and proceed. But understand that may not achieve the desired effect. If its contingent on actual cuts in the numbers of illegal aliens, then we may never get past the contingent part.


Let's wait until we see what the legislation says is "secure".


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users