Why do you ask, Shithead?
Agreed…but I can compromise some on the principal of making the border more secure. We can make it somewhat harder to get across illegally, and also make it a little easier to deport people who have arrived illegally very recently.
I want some kind of limitations rule, so if someone has been here for forty years, we won’t suddenly grab them and shove them over the border. But if someone is caught pretty much in the act of crossing, it needs to be slightly easier to deport them.
There’s room for some give on this end of the give-and-take. But so far, the Republican view is “Do what we want right now, and we’ll talk later (maybe) about what you want.” That isn’t negotiating, that’s extortion.
I have heard of false equivalency.
[searches Valteron’s posting history]
Excuse me, that should be, “I have heard of false equivalency, shithead.”
Or, should that be, “I have heard of false equivalency, homo/faggot/cocksucker/queerboy/buttpirate.”?
One sees the difference? Does one?
One wonders if one sees the difference between Valteron and Velocity…
:o Hey, RW V is RW V! :o
If you would THINK instead of just looking to post sites where you assume that others have done your work for you, you’d be better off. Come to think of it, you probably wouldn’t.
Concerning the first point you cited. Look at the date their talking about. Can you think of anything anomalous that might have happened around that time that might be unique?
Regarding the second point. The pay for jobs illegals take is artificially low. By that I meant that the market has not been allowed to come to a point where the actual value of the job has been able to be established. Illegal workers suppress the pay scale. Now, if you eliminate all illegals, the pay for those jobs that people want done would rise. Rise to a point that Americans would take them. That represents the true values of the job. If you just yank illegals out and expect Americans to snatch those jobs up, you’re delusional, as the wages have been artificially suppressed. Remove even the prospect that the jobs will be done for below-market wages and they will rise. This should be pretty easy to understand, really.
Well the cost and good and services go up? Sure. Some. But I know you don’t care about that because raising the minimum wage and placing mandates on company for health insurance do that, as well. And you’re just find with that. So think of removing illegals from the workforce as another means to giving low-skilled American workers a raise. Why would you have a problem with that?
Senate agreed to and passed a clean bill to fund DHS - the House tried to punt and pass a three week extension so that they can keep digging this mysterious hole they find themselves in. Boehner thought he had the votes to pass the extension - but, nope! Denied!
Good job, Republicans, on obstructing your own leadership!
DHS funding bill is due by midnight, tonight. Going to be a long Amateur Hour, apparently.
N.B.: The only way to do that is to regularize the status of those here now. Deportation of anywhere from 12 million to 30 million people is never going to happen.
Only 50 Republicans voted against the extension, 172 Democrats voted against it.
Now the Republicans are going to have to huddle together en banc and decide on what they’re going to do next.
So the huge majority of Democrats voting against the “clean” bill to fund DHS short term - is apparently not a “political game” but responsible behavior?
Try to sell that to the public.
Please. Fifty Republicans opposed it as well.
50 Republicans. 172 Democrats. Tell that to the public, then try to present it as the Republicans’ fault.
We don’t have to. Just as the public will always believe Democrats are the party of taxes and regulations, they will believe that the Republicans are the party of shutdowns, not matter what the circumstances.
I know. The public really punished the Republicans for the shutdown in the 2014 elections.
Do you think the voting public doesn’t know that 50 Republicans breaking ranks with their own leadership–on what should have been a slam-dunk–is a big deal?
(Beyond that, do you think the voting public doesn’t feel the Republicans have so far failed to live up to their promises prior to the last election? Nothing’s changed, it’s business as usual, and the expected Republican ass-kicking has not materialized. Voters see that.)
Talk about underestimating the voters’ intelligence. Voters in 2014 saw through the Democrats’ intransigence that led to the government shutdown. They will see it now as well. And wait till FCC shutdown, that will be fun.
Republicans will go back to their districts and say (at least those who voted against) that they could not, in good conscience, vote for a bill that funded President’s actions that they considered unconstitutional. That’s a one-sentence bit that any voter, even those who disagree, can understand.
Democrats will go back to their districts and bloviate about “clean bill” etc. Like voters know what “clean bill” is and why they should care if it is “clean”. Good luck.
If Boehner would submit the Senate bill tonight, it would pass. Of course, he’d probably not be the Speaker tomorrow.
I suspect that if he submits the Senate bill tonight, he’ll probably not be the Speaker much longer.
If the House cannot pass any legislation that can clear the Senate, does it really matter?