3rdnlng Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 That's what it's looking like. Securing the border was supposed to be a must, from the beginning. Now it's just another vague promise like in the 1980's. Marco Rubio, I really liked you but if this bs bill is what you support, good luck winning anything that's not ethnic. Secure the f'n borders, and then talk "amnesty", reuniting families and whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 As a Floridian, I'm sorely disappointed. Marco's hopes for higher office are in jeopardy as well as remaining a counterweight to the ancient Nelson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 12, 2013 Author Share Posted June 12, 2013 As a Floridian, I'm sorely disappointed. Marco's hopes for higher office are in jeopardy as well as remaining a counterweight to the ancient Nelson. As a guy from the NE, I really liked him. Not so much now. I've been down the "we'll fix the borders later" plan and it's not going to be on the table this time without a giant fight. Sorry Marco, we're serious this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PearlHowardman Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Just as bad, this so-called Immigration bill is not an Immigration bill. It's a jobs Outsourcing bill. The jobs situation is really bad right now and adding something like 11 million additional workers makes things worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Just as bad, this so-called Immigration bill is not an Immigration bill. It's a jobs Outsourcing bill. The jobs situation is really bad right now and adding something like 11 million additional UNION workers makes things worse. Fixed, becuase you know they will be "recruited" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted June 13, 2013 Share Posted June 13, 2013 A terrific film is available on this subject. I believe it was released in the last 90 days and Rubio is confronted on the matter in the film. www.theycometoamerica.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted June 13, 2013 Share Posted June 13, 2013 Does Mr. Reid really want a solution to the immigration problem, or will they just be used as a "campaign issue" again ? ? Reid Blocks Senate Vote on Border Security Amendment to Immigration Bill On Wednesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) blocked a vote on the border security amendment to the “Gang of Eight” immigration bill offered by Senate Judiciary Committee ranking member Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA). Grassley was pushing for an up-or-down vote by the Senate on his amendment, which would have required the border to be secured for six full months before any legalization of illegal immigrants in America began. Reid objected to Grassley’s motion, effectively implementing a 60-vote threshold that completely blocked any attempt at a fair vote on the amendment. Grassley protested Reid’s plan, which the Senate Majority Leader laughed off. “I’m somewhat surprised at this request,” Reid said in response. “How many times have we heard the Republican Leader say on this floor and publicly that the new reality in the United States Senate is 60?" So I just thought I was following the direction of the Republican Leader. I mean, this is what he said. That’s why we’re having 60 votes on virtually everything. And with this bill, with this bill, no one can in any way suggest this bill is not important and these amendments aren’t important. So, I care a great deal about my friend, the ranking member on this committee, but I object. Grassley responded with fury to Reid’s obstruction. “Well, it’s amazing to me that the majority has touted this immigration bill process as one that is open and regular order, but right out of the box, just on the third day, they want to subject our amendments to a filibuster like a 60-vote threshold.” “So I have to ask, who is obstructing now?" Grassley said. "There is no reason, particularly in this first week, at the beginning of the process, to be blocking our amendments with a 60-vote margin that’s required when you suppose there is a filibuster.”Grassley said the Senate should “at least start out” the immigration process with “regular order.” “Otherwise, it really looks like the fix is in and the bill is rigged to pass basically as it is,” Grassley said. “Bottom line, you should have seen how the 18 members of the Judiciary Committee operated for five or six days over a two-week period of time." "Everything was open, everything was transparent," he explained. "There was a complete cooperation between the majority and the minority, and there is no reason why we can’t do that out here in the United States Senate right now and particularly at the beginning." "This is a very provocative act,” Grassley warned. Grassley was not the only senator who expressed dissatisfaction with the process Reid was using on the Senate floor. Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), who voted in favor of the bill coming out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said during a floor speech that he is concerned votes on his amendments will be blocked as well. “I was promised by leaders in the Gang of Eight they would work with me, that they would help me to get these things done,” Hatch said. “I consider those promises to be very important, and yet I’ve had some indication over the last few days that maybe they’re not going to work with me." “If this is going to be a political exercise, count me out,” Hatch said. “If this is an exercise to really try and resolve the amnesty issues, if it’s an exercise to really really try and resolve these critical issues, I can be counted in." "Maybe I don’t mean that much in this debate, but if you look at some of the major sections of this bill, I helped work them out and I’ll help work out this bill not only with colleagues on this side but with colleagues on the other side of Capitol Hill. And I don’t want to be stiffed at this time and I’m not the kind of guy who takes stiffing lightly,” Hatch warned. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/12/Floor-Fight-Reid-blocks-Senate-vote-on-border-security-before-amnesty-amendment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 13, 2013 Author Share Posted June 13, 2013 Does Mr. Reid really want a solution to the immigration problem, or will they just be used as a "campaign issue" again ? ? http://www.breitbart...nesty-amendment Saw this earlier. What a crock. This is like 1986 all over. "F" you guys , agree to border security or go to hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 13, 2013 Share Posted June 13, 2013 Saw this earlier. What a crock. This is like 1986 all over. "F" you guys , agree to border security or go to hell. No, your line of reasoning is a crock. If you fix immigration, there wouldn't be a need to "protect" the border with Mexico since there will be a much easier way to come here for work instead of running the coyote express. The border safety issue has a lot more to do with drug running than it does with immigration. When will GOP get serious about that issue, instead of falsely connecting border violence to immigration? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted June 13, 2013 Share Posted June 13, 2013 http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2013-06-12.html As journalist Steve Sailer recently pointed out, the Hispanic vote terrifying Republicans isn't that big. It actually declined in 2012. The Census Bureau finally released the real voter turnout numbers from the last election, and the Hispanic vote came in at only 8.4 percent of the electorate -- not the 10 percent claimed by the pro-amnesty crowd. The sleeping giant of the last election wasn't Hispanics; it was elderly black women, terrified of media claims that Republicans were trying to suppress the black vote and determined to keep the first African-American president in the White House. Contrary to everyone's expectations, 10 percent more blacks voted in 2012 compared to 2008, even beating white voters, the usual turnout champions. Eligible black voters turned out at rate of 66.2 percent, compared to 64.1 percent of eligible white voters. Only 48 percent of all eligible Hispanic voters went to the polls. No one saw this coming, which is probably why Gallup had Romney up by 5 points before Hurricane Sandy hit, and up by 1 point in its last pre-election poll after the hurricane. Only two groups voted in larger numbers in 2012 compared to 2008: blacks aged 45-64, and blacks over the age of 65 -- mostly elderly black women. In raw numbers, nearly twice as many blacks voted as Hispanics, and nine times as many whites voted as Hispanics. (Ninety-eight million whites, 18 million blacks and 11 million Hispanics.) So, naturally, the Republican Party's entire battle plan going forward is to win slightly more votes from 8.4 percent of the electorate by giving them something they don't want. As Byron York has shown, even if Mitt Romney had won 70 percent of the Hispanic vote, he still would have lost. No Republican presidential candidate in at least 50 years has won even half of the Hispanic vote. In the presidential election immediately after Reagan signed an amnesty bill in 1986, the Republican share of the Hispanic vote actually declined from 37 percent to 30 percent -- and that was in a landslide election for the GOP. Combined, the two Bush presidents averaged 32.5 percent of the Hispanic vote -- and they have Hispanics in their family Christmas cards. John McCain, the nation's leading amnesty proponent, won only 31 percent of the Hispanic vote, not much more than anti-amnesty Romney's 27 percent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 13, 2013 Author Share Posted June 13, 2013 No, your line of reasoning is a crock. If you fix immigration, there wouldn't be a need to "protect" the border with Mexico since there will be a much easier way to come here for work instead of running the coyote express. The border safety issue has a lot more to do with drug running than it does with immigration. When will GOP get serious about that issue, instead of falsely connecting border violence to immigration? s So, are you saying we shouldn't secure the borders? Besides the drug running there is no reason to have secure borders? Do you have any idea how many illegals are here and not working? Are we going to give amnesty to the illegals that are gang members? If we deport them what's to keep them from coming back? Understand that there are a whole bunch of politicians that really don't care about secure borders. They want the votes that immigrants will bring. There's another side that understands that we need to fix the immigration problem but also knows that work visas aren't going to solve the most serious problems with illegal immigration. I have no problem holding a new immigration bill hostage in order to secure the border. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted June 16, 2013 Share Posted June 16, 2013 Rubio has always been a douche, I am surprised this surprises people... the guy was nothing more then a shill to the interests of the voting public to win the election. He has no backbone and no commitment to anything he has said except those which initially got him elected and repay the powers that be which got him elected. Whats his name, the leather looking guy...Charlie Crist...was much better then Rubio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts