Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

immigration round whatever


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> immigration round whatever Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 12:24:15 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		http://news.yahoo.com/rubio-cruz-compete-reshape-records-immigration-081300699--election.html

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/534

Looks like S.534 - Immigration Rule of Law Act of 2015 will probably come up for a vote. If so, it appears to me that it will invalidate Obama's EO's


Profile   Post #: 1
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 12:37:23 PM   
DesideriScuri


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

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
http://news.yahoo.com/rubio-cruz-compete-reshape-records-immigration-081300699--election.html
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/534
Looks like S.534 - Immigration Rule of Law Act of 2015 will probably come up for a vote. If so, it appears to me that it will invalidate Obama's EO's


The legislation has to get passed by the House and the Senate, and then signed into law by the President. Until then, it will have no bearing on the EO's.


_____________________________

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 KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 12:43:24 PM   
DaNewAgeViking


Posts: 1009
Joined: 4/29/2004
Status: offline 		Ho-hum. Another attempt to force Obama to destroy himself by vetoing poisonous bills which wouldn't pass either constitutional muster or the sniff test anyway. You have to wonder about the Tea-psycho mindset which figures standing up to them is political suicide?

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 12:51:41 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		DS I think it is significant because people have been screaming for Congress to do something. This is something,. Whether or not we agree or disagree with its content. And yes I think we all or at least the majority of us know that it has to pass both houses and that will take time. I also think that as a matter of law, it would affect all future POTUS

DAV Not sure how it would fail the constitutional test. Please explain.

(in reply to DaNewAgeViking)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 1:00:14 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: KenDckey

DS I think it is significant because people have been screaming for Congress to do something.

Not true. The bigots have always been running their mouths about how much they hate mexicans coded to "illegal aliens" but refuse to target the felons who hire the illegal alliens who commit only a misdemenor. Why do you hate mexicans? Why do you want felons to not be arrested?


This is something,. Whether or not we agree or disagree with its content.


As you have been informed so many times, the felons who hire the illegals are subject to hundreds of years in prion billions in fines and asset forfieture....but you and the rest of the bigots keep stamping your feet like petulant children..."get the mexicans ...get the mexicans.

And yes I think we all or at least the majority of us know that it has to pass both houses and that will take time. I also think that as a matter of law, it would affect all future POTUS


If the bigots would focus on the felons instead of their hatred of mexicans this would not be an issue.


(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 1:04:31 PM   
DesideriScuri


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

ORIGINAL: KenDckey
DS I think it is significant because people have been screaming for Congress to do something. This is something,. Whether or not we agree or disagree with its content. And yes I think we all or at least the majority of us know that it has to pass both houses and that will take time. I also think that as a matter of law, it would affect all future POTUS
DAV Not sure how it would fail the constitutional test. Please explain.


Ken, it might be significant simply because they've now done something, but it's not going to have any bearing on Obama's EO's unless Obama signs them into law. Why would the President do that, unless there was veto-proof support in both chambers of Congress (very unlikely)? If legislation garnered veto-proof support, isn't it likely that the President would be in favor (or at least accepting of the bill) anyway?

My disagreement with the OP was that it was going to have an effect on the EO's.

DNAV, there is nothing saying the bill is going to get to the President's desk to sign anyway. I don't think Obama has any designs on running for elected political office anytime soon (and I wouldn't blame him one bit; that man needs a long vacation to relax and decompress, like pretty much every other former President), so there isn't really much to destroy. It's not like the GOP will be able to use an Obama veto against Hillary or Sanders. Sanders' vote or non-vote, might be able to be used against Sanders, but that's not going to be tied to Obama signing or vetoing the bill.


_____________________________

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 KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 1:14:25 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: KenDckey

DS I think it is significant because people have been screaming for Congress to do something.

Not true. The bigots have always been running their mouths about how much they hate mexicans coded to "illegal aliens" but refuse to target the felons who hire the illegal alliens who commit only a misdemenor. Why do you hate mexicans? Why do you want felons to not be arrested?


This is something,. Whether or not we agree or disagree with its content.


As you have been informed so many times, the felons who hire the illegals are subject to hundreds of years in prion billions in fines and asset forfieture....but you and the rest of the bigots keep stamping your feet like petulant children..."get the mexicans ...get the mexicans.

And yes I think we all or at least the majority of us know that it has to pass both houses and that will take time. I also think that as a matter of law, it would affect all future POTUS


If the bigots would focus on the felons instead of their hatred of mexicans this would not be an issue.



Silly man. My kids are african American 1st Generation. My Daughter in law of my eldest got her green card on amnesty. My father was a card carrying member of the nations in Oklahoma. How do you figure I am predjuice against mexicans or anyone else for that matter. That aside. I am in favor of the enforcement of the laws on the books. Until those laws are eliminated, modified or increased, then they should be enforced. I disagree with some laws, agree with others, but that is my right. You have the same right. And I didn't say a thing about Mexicans. Not sure how you came up with that one. Illegal immigration is illegal and should be enforced. If the congress grants amnesty then I won't have a problem with not deporting anyone. If the president gets his signing pen out and signs amnesty for each and every one of the millions of illegals, then they are off scott free. Don't think he has the time to do that tho. If the next anti-illegal immigration POTUS comes to power and recends Obama's EOs then it will be much easier to locate a lot of the illegals for potential deportation. In the mean time this is movement on an issue of appearant importance in the US.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 1:35:05 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		ORIGINAL: KenDckey


ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: KenDckey

DS I think it is significant because people have been screaming for Congress to do something.

Not true. The bigots have always been running their mouths about how much they hate mexicans coded to "illegal aliens" but refuse to target the felons who hire the illegal alliens who commit only a misdemenor. Why do you hate mexicans? Why do you want felons to not be arrested?


This is something,. Whether or not we agree or disagree with its content.


As you have been informed so many times, the felons who hire the illegals are subject to hundreds of years in prion billions in fines and asset forfieture....but you and the rest of the bigots keep stamping your feet like petulant children..."get the mexicans ...get the mexicans.

And yes I think we all or at least the majority of us know that it has to pass both houses and that will take time. I also think that as a matter of law, it would affect all future POTUS


If the bigots would focus on the felons instead of their hatred of mexicans this would not be an issue.



Silly man. My kids are african American 1st Generation. My Daughter in law of my eldest got her green card on amnesty. My father was a card carrying member of the nations in Oklahoma. How do you figure I am predjuice against mexicans or anyone else for that matter.

Of course they are????That is why you would rather arrest mexicans who have committed a misdemenor and not those who commit felonies...It is a common theme in your post that is why I and everyone who reads your biggoted posts know you to be prejudice.


That aside. I am in favor of the enforcement of the laws on the books.

How about you show us where you have called with the same sort of urgency for the arrest of those felons who hire the illegals?


Until those laws are eliminated, modified or increased, then they should be enforced.

You, being a "fiscally responsible" right winger, would rather spend money deporting your hated mexicans rather than put the felons in prison. With the felons in prison and their companies sold to the highest bidder who, with a three digit i.q., would hire an illegal?
So your self serving hand wringing about all dem mexicans is clearly nothing more than thinly disguised bigotry.


I disagree with some laws, agree with others, but that is my right. You have the same right. And I didn't say a thing about Mexicans. Not sure how you came up with that one.


Well gee which illegal aliens were you or any of the other bigot be speaking of? The whole phoquing rt. wing of amerikan politiks talks about this. Do you think that by not saying you hate mexicans somehow disguises your intent? Do you really think the people on this board are that stupid to think you were talking about the irish or the nigerians or the xians?

In the mean time this is movement on an issue of appearant importance in the US.


It certianly is an issue of importance to the bigots in the u.s.a.

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 1:47:55 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		I guess I forgot to mention that my daughter in law is Mexican (hasn't gotten US citizenship).

That aside. I didn't say deport Mexicans. I said deport illegals. To me it doesn't matter where they come from. Not sure how you equate this to bigotry. It is a matter of law. Not bigotry. Why is it that when someone says we should enforce laws on the books that they are bigots unless they are considered "progressive" laws. I don't see a problem here other than cost. And then, it might be considered an employment boon for American Citizens. And law enforcement pays pretty good compared to minimum wage.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 2:01:31 PM   
LadyConstanze


Posts: 9722
Joined: 2/18/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

I guess I forgot to mention that my daughter in law is Mexican (hasn't gotten US citizenship).

That aside. I didn't say deport Mexicans. I said deport illegals. To me it doesn't matter where they come from. Not sure how you equate this to bigotry. It is a matter of law. Not bigotry. Why is it that when someone says we should enforce laws on the books that they are bigots unless they are considered "progressive" laws. I don't see a problem here other than cost. And then, it might be considered an employment boon for American Citizens. And law enforcement pays pretty good compared to minimum wage.



The flaw in your reasoning is simple

LE costs the tax payer
Illegal immigrants translate to cheap labor, you know, hotels, restaurants, oranges, strawberries, all that stuff would cost a lot more to buy if they would be forced to pay at least minimum wage, not to mention building sites...

How about solving the problem by hitting the companies who employ illegals with massive fines? Fines that they really feel? And people willing to pay fair prices for goods?

_____________________________

There are 10 kinds of people who understand binary
Those who do and those who don't!

http://exdomme.blogspot.com/2012/07/public-service-announcement.html

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 2:08:53 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline 		ORIGINAL: KenDckey

I guess I forgot to mention that my daughter in law is Mexican (hasn't gotten US citizenship).

And your best friend is a mexican...that is why you want to depror those who commit misdemenors and have yet to call for the arrest of the felons who employ them .

That aside. I didn't say deport Mexicans. I said deport illegals. To me it doesn't matter where they come from.


How stupid do you think the people who read this board are. Do you really think we think you are speaking of the irish?

Not sure how you equate this to bigotry. It is a matter of law. Not bigotry.


As you have been informed many times the law says 5 years in the federal slam and a quarter million dollar fine for hiring one who crosses the border illegally... each violation ...yet you want to round up 10 million or more and spend the money to deport them...it is pretty obvious when you focus on the mexican and not the employer that you are a bigot.

Why is it that when someone says we should enforce laws on the books that they are bigots unless they are considered "progressive" laws.

Why don't you want to enforde the law against hireing illegals?


I don't see a problem here other than cost. And then, it might be considered an employment boon for American Citizens. And law enforcement pays pretty good compared to minimum wage.


A good tea party bigot like yourself would rather spend taxpayers money rounding up millions of misdemenor mexicans as opposed to enforcing the one law that would end illegal immigaration...how is that not bigotry?

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 2:10:18 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		LC I understand that law enforcement is costly. So is rewarding illegals with social benefits. The cost of goods and services may well go up. I am not 100% positive that they will, but i can agree that is one probable outcome. But regardless, it doesn't seem to address the selective enforcement of laws. "sancutary cities" that won't repond to Fed requests because the persoon is illegal, enforcement of federal drug laws, and on and on. Law enforcement was hired to enforce the law. Prosecutors were hired to represent the interests of the people as described by the law. if they are unwilling to accomplish their mission, then someone should be hired to replace them.

(in reply to LadyConstanze)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 2:17:30 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze

How about solving the problem by hitting the companies who employ illegals with massive fines? Fines that they really feel?

The law is already there. The penality for hiring one who crosses the border illegally is five years in the federal prison (from which there is no porole...a day showing is a day owing) and a $250,000 fine for each illegal alien employed. Assett forfeture if it is found to be an ongoing practice. Imagine the feds confiscating the walton fortune and all the stores and sellling them to the highest bidder.
This is the current law in the usa. Ken knows it but would rather phoque with the brown people and pontificate about enforcing the misdomenor while ignoring the felony committed by those who employ them.

(in reply to LadyConstanze)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 2:24:06 PM   
mnottertail


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

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

LC I understand that law enforcement is costly. So is rewarding illegals with social benefits. The cost of goods and services may well go up. I am not 100% positive that they will, but i can agree that is one probable outcome. But regardless, it doesn't seem to address the selective enforcement of laws. "sancutary cities" that won't repond to Fed requests because the persoon is illegal, enforcement of federal drug laws, and on and on. Law enforcement was hired to enforce the law. Prosecutors were hired to represent the interests of the people as described by the law. if they are unwilling to accomplish their mission, then someone should be hired to replace them.


Oh for fucks sake, everyone knows where the illegal aliens are, get a bunch of buses raid the corporations, take all their money and sell the sons a bitches out, and run those buses to the border.


_____________________________

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


(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 2:27:36 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		Oh I am all in favor of enforcing employment law. If it is the law, enforce it. I have been real consistant in saying that. Seems my friends on the other side try to pervert that, but if it is a lwa enforce it. Period. Not selective enforcement, ALL the laws. And personally, I think $250K per illegal is to small. Maybe 2 million or so. And if it puts the mom and pop out of operation or the huge corporation (starting at the division and working its way up to the top) makes no difference to me. But, I think it is congress that set the amount. So I will live with it.

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 2:43:56 PM   
LadyConstanze


Posts: 9722
Joined: 2/18/2005
Status: offline 		I spend quite a bit of my time in the US, legally, they actually keep reminding me that I can apply for citizenship, for several reasons, I don't want to.

Trust me, most of the hotels, restaurants and catering industry would not be able to keep their prices if they would be forced to pay minimum wage (which isn't anywhere near enough to survive on).

I spent a fair bit of my time over there, let me back it up a bit, I used to have a green card and returned to Europe years ago for personal reasons, one of my old bosses had congestive heart failure, he needed a person (family member or friend) to volunteer to be his care giver to make it on the transplant list, since his family lives on the East Coast and due to work commitments or health reasons couldn't do it, I volunteered. I was checked out, my background (PhD in medical English done at the European Heart Center) made me ideal as I knew about the massive side effects some of the drugs have (still different if you are living with it, it was challenging, physically and emotionally - think roid rage), the Cedars Sinai strongly recommended me, especially since they said the connection with the patient is important. Ideally there are 3 different ones, there were 2, one family member flaked out, the burden was on me. He had several relapses, so I went back and forth a bit. I learned to avoid Philly airport at all costs, I usually was held up for hours, threatened, treated with contempt, they acted like I was trying to get into the country, you know, leaving hubby, pets, property and our company behind to become an illegal because "Everybody wants to live in the US..."

I can tell you it was not my intention to work over there, I wasn't paid, it was about the life of my friend (a US citizen), by chance I hooked up with people I knew from my previous career as a journo, could help them out of a few jams, they offered me jobs, I'm taxed for the money I earn in the US, when I am in the US I stay with my friend (who actually is a senior board consultant of a major network is very conservative), his health isn't the best and trust me, I'd be more comfy in a hotel, but he needs somebody to sort out things for him. Would you like me to tell you how difficult it was to find a house keeper for him? He paid above minimum wage and it was next to impossible finding anybody with papers willing to do it. Stroke of luck, a relative from a house keeper of a friend, fresh off the boat, needed a job. She is a jewel, he is so happy to have found her, $18 an hour (he is underpaying in my book) but she is on the case and goes beyond the call of duty. But we went through tons and tons of people, usually their first words were "I don't do...."

I honestly think the minimum wage needs to be raised, WalMart and companies that pay their people so little that they qualify for social services (you pay for that shit) should be forced to pay fair wages. If companies are fined in case they employ illegals, it will remove the lure for said illegals (also illegals don't qualify for social services), deporting illegals costs money, quite a bit, charge the companies who employ them. Go to the root of the problem. Now if you people can actually exist from a minimum wage, most of them would work, if working for minimum wage still puts you on benefits, where is the point?

I might have considered relocating, but after the experiences at Philly airport, hell no, not ever, all my paperwork, a letter from Sen Feinstein supporting my case, letters from the Sinai, and I was treated like a criminal, yelled at, told I am lying... I think maybe the US might rethink their approach, there is also tourism (a multi billion dollar industry) and people don't want to travel to the US due to the treatment they get from border officers.

_____________________________

There are 10 kinds of people who understand binary
Those who do and those who don't!

http://exdomme.blogspot.com/2012/07/public-service-announcement.html

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 2:52:38 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		LC I totally Understand,. Americans are their own worst enemy internationally. I think it is for many reasons. Mostly because of American prudishness and thinking that the world should change to be the way we are. I have had my share of troubles traveling internationally while in the Military. The only place I ever felt welcome was the City of Berlin Germany and Massawa, Eritreia.

(in reply to LadyConstanze)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 3:01:56 PM   
mnottertail


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

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

Oh I am all in favor of enforcing employment law. If it is the law, enforce it. I have been real consistant in saying that. Seems my friends on the other side try to pervert that, but if it is a lwa enforce it. Period. Not selective enforcement, ALL the laws. And personally, I think $250K per illegal is to small. Maybe 2 million or so. And if it puts the mom and pop out of operation or the huge corporation (starting at the division and working its way up to the top) makes no difference to me. But, I think it is congress that set the amount. So I will live with it.

If by the other side, you mean the shitbreathers in the house and senate that wont pay for that......................yeah.


So, you cant have free enforcement. it cannot be both.

_____________________________

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


(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 3:11:06 PM   
LadyConstanze


Posts: 9722
Joined: 2/18/2005
Status: offline 		There are a lot of things I do like about the US, however some laws do not make sense, sometimes I think your country is actually trying to stop people to think for themselves, the whole thing about voter fraud which is minimal, yet they make it so difficult for people to have IDs, on the other hand you can enter gun shows and buy guns without the need for background checks.

Call me weird, but that is a factor where I say "I feel uneasy about it"

Then all the amount that is spent in Europe on advertising for trips to the US, just take Disney as an example. So people are going on flights that are between 6 and 9 hours, they are going to spend their money in the US, they use hotels, rent cars, eat in restaurants, shop, go to shows... That's money going into the US system, you know how many people rather go to other places just because of the treatment they receive? According to the laws every foreigner entering the US is a suspected illegal, fair enough, but please, don't make them feel that way if you want their money. I'm sure you have the odd illegal from Europe, but in all fairness, who would give up health care and social services for nothing and the thread to be deported?

And whenever I'm in LA, you know I actually prefer shopping in little Hispanic shops, in Ralph's they tend to be offended when you ask where something is, the little Mexican supermarket, they show you and even tell you how to prepare some dishes with it. Don't even get me started on NYC, lived there for several years and now don't recognize it, they so gentrified it that it outpriced most of the people, Manhattan is now some weird Yuppie land that's been disneyfied. The same thing that happened with London. Paris and Munich, and Berlin is heading that way.

_____________________________

There are 10 kinds of people who understand binary
Those who do and those who don't!

http://exdomme.blogspot.com/2012/07/public-service-announcement.html

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: immigration round whatever - 11/13/2015 3:23:41 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline 		LOL I am afraid to walk on the sidewalk in Paris and Rome. LOL They will run over you with a car there for being a pedestrian.

(in reply to LadyConstanze)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> immigration round whatever Page: [1] 2   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

0.110