Jump to content




Photo
- - - - -

Rubio and bipartisan immigration bill


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
18 replies to this topic

#1 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • Joined: 17-March 09
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
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: 13,865
  • Reputation: 4,621
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: 1,161
  • Reputation: 516
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: 12,811
  • Reputation: 2,516
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: 12,811
  • Reputation: 2,516
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: 24,926
  • Reputation: 2,616
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: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
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: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
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: 18,191
  • Reputation: 1,566
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: 19,303
  • Reputation: 483
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".

#11 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • posts: 12,811
  • Reputation: 2,516
Moderators

Posted 29 January 2013 - 01:12 PM

Sounds dangerously like a carrot. As long as things aren't defined, it's real easy constantly dangle the idea of citizenship to the workers without every really going through any meaningful reform.

Then you can say "We tried reform and it just doesn't work" while continuing to go forward with the backwards, harmful, and lazy regulations we have today without ever really trying anything different at all.

#12 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • Joined: 24-November 08
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • posts: 17,286
  • Reputation: 5,448
HUDDLER

Posted 29 January 2013 - 01:24 PM

I like what I hear from Rubio.

how far have you actually delved into his political views? i hear a lot of moderates saying they like Rubio, but don't seem to realize he's two steps to the right of Pat Robertson.