Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Eric Cantor defeated!


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Eric Cantor defeated! Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/18/2014 6:29:46 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


You just have a narrow -- stuck-in-one-place -- view on immigration -- namely not expanding immigration to include people with already in the USA with substantial ties, good moral character, and a lot to contribute.

You're stuck on the word Amnesty for reason I simply don't understand --- better to be stuck on "how do I solve this problem."


Considering how they are coming over the border in wave after wave after wave, literally flooding in, doesn't your idea of "amnesty" simply mean that amnesty goes on and on and on... As in, we have no border, no culture, no laws, and no order?





Well, since St. Wrinklemeat gave amnesty to 4 million, then allowed the wave after wave of a burgeoning 11 million illegals in, and neither of the Bush cretins did nothing on that, the deporter in chief has many years of nutsackerism to overcome, and seems to be getting the job done.


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to Sanity)
Profile   Post #: 161
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/18/2014 9:36:37 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
VIII. A PATH TO LEGALITY FOR WORKERS ALREADY HERE
Finally, any comprehensive immigration reform worth its name
must offer a path to legal status for the millions of workers
already here without authorization. It would be an economic and
humanitarian disaster, as well as an administrative nightmare,
to round up the 12,000,000 people already here illegally and
somehow deport them back to their home countries.
Any realistic immigration reform must recognize that many
undocumented workers have become valued employees. Most
have been in the country for five years or more, and 34% have
been here for more than a decade. Their contributions to the US
Economy shoudl be recognized and weighed against their violations
of US immigration laws.
Long-­standing critics of comprehensive immigration reform
will brand any legalization as an “amnesty.” But amnesty means
a general pardon, in particular for political offenses. Legalization
would not be a pardon or amnesty because, according to the most
serious proposals put forward in Congress, undocumented
workers would be expected to pay fines and back taxes. They
would undergo security checks and could even be required to
leave the country before being allowed to enter legally. They
would not be granted automatic permanent legal status but only
temporary status to remain and work in the United States for a
specified period of time.
Americans expect the law to be respected and obeyed, and
those who violate the United States’ laws to face the appropriate
consequences. But at the same time, laws must be reasonable
and not fundamentally out of step with how millions of otherwise
peaceful and hardworking people arrange their lives."
P. 15. As noted.
http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/articles/Griswold_Introduction.pdf


You should also note that there is nothing in that about improving the economy through providing legal presence to illegal immigrants. Valuable employees? Many of them certainly are. I'd not even argue with someone who said the vast majority are valuable employees. But, they broke the law, didn't they?

And, I do find it funny that what I support (sending them to the back of the line) was even something brought up as a possibility, making my ideas align that much more with the CATO Inst.




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 162
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/18/2014 10:23:51 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		I'll ask again, how? How do we do anything to 10+ million people mixed into the general population without having to turn the country into a police state?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 163
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/18/2014 10:59:30 AM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
He's opposed to economic growth and solving problems. It's a matter of principle. This is not my first rodeo with him here -- he's holding the classic, hardline, tea party stance on the issue.

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 164
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/18/2014 3:48:14 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy
He's opposed to economic growth and solving problems. It's a matter of principle. This is not my first rodeo with him here -- he's holding the classic, hardline, tea party stance on the issue.


Can you cite the proof of economic growth by legalizing anyone who is already here, working, living in houses, and buying stuff? Supporting immigration (which I and most conservatives actually do) and supporting granting legal status to those already here illegally are very different.

No, it's not our first rodeo. You should really stop playing the rodeo clown.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
I'll ask again, how? How do we do anything to 10+ million people mixed into the general population without having to turn the country into a police state?


Are we a police state now? How about we close the borders to get some semblance of control on the influx of new illegal immigrants, increase the fines on those who hire illegals, and deport the ones we catch. Allowing a path for citizenship should not include letting them stay here. There should be a price paid for "linejumping."


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to cloudboy)
Profile   Post #: 165
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/18/2014 4:13:01 PM   
cloudboy


Posts: 7306
Joined: 12/14/2005
Status: offline
Good luck controlling migration and people doing anything they can to seek out opportunities.

Had not the USA squandered $1 Trillion Dollars in IRAQ -- maybe we could have helped foster development in Latin and South America.

Anyway, back to our regularly scheduled channel: DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL.


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 166
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/18/2014 5:02:29 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
I'll ask again, how? How do we do anything to 10+ million people mixed into the general population without having to turn the country into a police state?


Are we a police state now? How about we close the borders to get some semblance of control on the influx of new illegal immigrants, increase the fines on those who hire illegals, and deport the ones we catch. Allowing a path for citizenship should not include letting them stay here. There should be a price paid for "linejumping."


Close the borders? Do you have any concept of the length of the US frontier? How precisely will it be secured? And again there are better than 10 million already here leaving them in limbo forever is a terrible idea.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 167
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/18/2014 8:27:56 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri


Supporting immigration (which most conservatives actually do)

Can you cite the proof of this?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 168
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 10:56:24 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
I'll ask again, how? How do we do anything to 10+ million people mixed into the general population without having to turn the country into a police state?

Are we a police state now? How about we close the borders to get some semblance of control on the influx of new illegal immigrants, increase the fines on those who hire illegals, and deport the ones we catch. Allowing a path for citizenship should not include letting them stay here. There should be a price paid for "linejumping."

Close the borders? Do you have any concept of the length of the US frontier? How precisely will it be secured? And again there are better than 10 million already here leaving them in limbo forever is a terrible idea.


There are already a plan for securing the southern border. IIRC, there is already passed legislation to execute that plan. Something tells me that we Americans can figure out a way to secure our Northern border, too.

Quick attainment of legal status for someone who came here illegally shouldn't be less than, easier than, nor less expensive than it is for someone attempting to gain legal status through the proper legal channels. Those here illegally chose to get here illegally, rather than going through legal channels. Why should it be easier for them than it is for those who choose legal methods?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 169
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 11:34:39 AM   
Tkman117


Posts: 1353
Joined: 5/21/2012
Status: offline 		Secure your northern border? Why? The USA has nothing Canadian citizens want that we either dont already have or dont want period. Our drinking age in Ontario and Quebec for example is 19 and 18 respectively, we're better than the US in terms of healthcare (I don't even need to cite this as everyone knows that recent study put the USA at the bottom of the list for developed countries in terms of health care), we have a good handle on gun violence, we haven't legalized bribery and equated money with freedom. Half our country isn't represented by lunatics, the Conservatives here actually hold a somewhat decent platform at times, we are kind to each other and dont fear for our lives on a daily basis. We are North America's highest exporter of crude, on a provincial level we actually invest in green technologies, transportation, and education, something the USA doesn't do because it wasted $1 Trillion in a phoney war and invested the rest into a bloated military which now does almost nothing. We aren't gridlocked by neanderthal issues such as Gay rights, women's rights, blatant and obvious racism, fake scandals involving our leader, or a minority view on gun rights. Ontario's last election was all about the economy, not once did any of the typical American BS arguments ever come up in a debate. In fact, the woman who won the premiership was a Lesbian, which just shows how farther ahead on social issues we are.

The only thing that some people in Canada would want from the US are your guns, and those are likely the criminals, not most people, and I doubt they would want to stay once they have them. Shopping in the US can also be a bit cheaper depending on where the dollars are in relation to each other, but again, people aren't crossing illegally for it. People who want to become doctors would make a good amount in the US for obvious reasons but they're hardly crossing illegally. Although you are number 1 in incarceration, but I don't see that as a selling point to convince Canadians to come and try to cross illegally into america. There is the drug trade, which likely crosses the border illegally to move shipments, but you got to wonder how many people are moving drugs across into Canada or the other way around and staying illegally, just doesnt seem like a convincing argument.

Seriously, secure your northern border? If things don't change soon, I'll start agreeing with you. Except you people will be trying to keep YOUR people from crossing into Canada illegally, not the other way around. I mean, Canada isn't perfect, we got our fair share of problems too, there's no question about that. But I'm gonna be arrogant and say we are leagues ahead of where the Americans are in this day and age, and it will stay that way if you guys don't change things around for the better.

End Rant

< Message edited by Tkman117 -- 6/19/2014 11:37:37 AM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 170
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 11:48:19 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
I'll ask again, how? How do we do anything to 10+ million people mixed into the general population without having to turn the country into a police state?

Are we a police state now? How about we close the borders to get some semblance of control on the influx of new illegal immigrants, increase the fines on those who hire illegals, and deport the ones we catch. Allowing a path for citizenship should not include letting them stay here. There should be a price paid for "linejumping."

Close the borders? Do you have any concept of the length of the US frontier? How precisely will it be secured? And again there are better than 10 million already here leaving them in limbo forever is a terrible idea.


There are already a plan for securing the southern border. IIRC, there is already passed legislation to execute that plan. Something tells me that we Americans can figure out a way to secure our Northern border, too.

Quick attainment of legal status for someone who came here illegally shouldn't be less than, easier than, nor less expensive than it is for someone attempting to gain legal status through the proper legal channels. Those here illegally chose to get here illegally, rather than going through legal channels. Why should it be easier for them than it is for those who choose legal methods?


There is no legislation to really secure the southern border. There is a half assed plan that would put a fence along the Mexican border. That is only a very small portion of our southern border, significantly less than half actually. Even that fence would not secure the border as it would not be monitored in a way that would prevent penetration and it would cost billions to build and billions more to maintain.

No one is saying it should be easy for those already here to get legal status but the fact is they are already here and there is no reasonable way to get rid of them so we need to regularize there status.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 171
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 11:51:55 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		People cross the NY/Canada border with illegal goods all the time, and always will, simply because so much of it is forest, water, and reservation lands (which even straddle the border).

I'm sure that's not different from the rest of the northern border.

Even then, there's always by ocean on the eastern border.




< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 6/19/2014 11:52:54 AM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 172
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 1:29:32 PM   
subrob1967


Posts: 4591
Joined: 9/13/2004
Status: offline 		FR

The only thing stopping the US from securing it's borders is political will. Hell, we parachuted a radio controlled car with cameras onto fucking Mars, and you really think the brains working for the government couldn't come up with a solution for securing the nation?

Really?

_____________________________

http://www.extra-life.org/

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 173
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 1:44:34 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline 		Exactly the point -- getting in is far easier than keeping out. Even on Mars.

There are trade-offs . . . do you want the beaches lined with walls and troops? Flotillas at the edge of international waters with sonar and anti-aircraft? Sensors deep below the ground to prevent tunnels? Walls high enough to be useful in snows several feet deep? Troops lining the walls to keep anyone going over? Food and quarters for all those troops? Money for all that new infrastructure? The wall for the southern border costs $1 million per mile to build -- let alone monitor. Walls in snow and sea would need constant maintenance and repair as well.

In the real world, stuff costs money. In this case, a LOT of money.

So yes, I really think the brains working for the government can't come up with a *feasible* plan for securing every inch of land, underground, water, and air. No do I think they'd want to.

Securing the nation is what we have now.

And having reasonable paths to citizenship would help that security.



< Message edited by Musicmystery -- 6/19/2014 1:46:36 PM >

(in reply to subrob1967)
Profile   Post #: 174
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 2:25:54 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		I'd like a customs agent to physically look inside every container that comes through a US port, a recommendation of the 9/11 commission that still hasn't been implemented.  That alone would cost many millions but it really would go a long way towards securing the nation. right now it would be relatively easy to ship in almost anything, except nuclear material there are sensors for that in the container ports, in a container

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 175
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 3:04:56 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		But, they broke the law, didn't they?

As you have been told on numerous occasions it is a motherfucking misdomeanor.Do you realize how transparant your fucking biggotry is? I have yet to hear you talk about those who employ them. They are guilty of a felony with a penality of $250,000 and 5 years in the federal slam for each violation. How much would be your share of the bounty on someone who had a hundred illegals working for them?

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 6/19/2014 3:06:08 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 176
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 3:20:31 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		increase the fines on those who hire illegals,

This shows how fucking mindnumbingly stupid the shit you post is.How much more than $250,000 + 5 years in the federal slam for each violation do you want to add to a law that is not being enforced.






and deport the ones we catch.

What sort of moron would pay to deport someone who was leaving? If you stopped acting the bigot and arrested the employers the employees would go home on their own nickle. But that does not fit your bigot view. Why do you want us to pay to enforce your bigoted behaviour?



Allowing a path for citizenship should not include letting them stay here. There should be a price paid for "linejumping."

You seem to have a thing for punishing those that are weaker than you...where I come from that is called being a punkassmotherfucker.

Quick attainment of legal status for someone who came here illegally shouldn't be less than, easier than, nor less expensive than it is for someone attempting to gain legal status through the proper legal channels.

Since you have not a clue as to what those legal channels are nor what the quota is for mexico yearly your statement is clearly a self serving plate of turds.




Those here illegally chose to get here illegally, rather than going through legal channels. Why should it be easier for them than it is for those who choose legal methods?

Your buffonary is astounding. You do not know what the rules are yet you expound with faux indignation...have you ever wondered why no one on this forum takes your mindless drivel seriously.

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 6/19/2014 3:21:57 PM >

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 177
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 4:37:22 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117
Secure your northern border? Why? The USA has nothing Canadian citizens want that we either dont already have or dont want period.


I didn't know there weren't anyone but Canadians in Canada. Ever. I'm so happy that no one could get into Canada to cross the US border illegally. Whew. There's a load off my mind.

We might be able to secure the border from illegal Canadian immigration by putting up signs threatening them to having to drink a 6-pack of Bud, Coors or Miller if they're caught. That should be close enough to torture to prevent illegal Canadian immigration.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Tkman117)
Profile   Post #: 178
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 4:56:33 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
There is no legislation to really secure the southern border. There is a half assed plan that would put a fence along the Mexican border. That is only a very small portion of our southern border, significantly less than half actually. Even that fence would not secure the border as it would not be monitored in a way that would prevent penetration and it would cost billions to build and billions more to maintain.


Your half-assed knowledge of the plan fails to get that there are provisions included to allow DHS to use high tech means of monitoring.

quote:

No one is saying it should be easy for those already here to get legal status but the fact is they are already here and there is no reasonable way to get rid of them so we need to regularize there status.


Throw in the towel on upholding our laws?!? I shudder to think about what else is "too difficult" for the US to do and better to give up on.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 179
RE: Eric Cantor defeated! - 6/19/2014 4:59:24 PM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri I shudder to think about what else is "too difficult" for the US to do and better to give up on.


Many things, actually. Speeding enforcement is spotty at best, along with many other traffic laws. Many people drive drunk and aren't caught each time. Environmental and workplace laws often go unenforced due to insufficient staff. People steal and don't get caught. Etc etc etc

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Eric Cantor defeated! Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109