fbpx

Type to search

House GOP Gives Up Fight On Homeland Security Funds, Approves Budget

Politics Top News Tribune News Service

House GOP Gives Up Fight On Homeland Security Funds, Approves Budget

Share
US Senate leaders struck a deal to avert an ugly shutdown and fund homeland security operations through September, but it remained unclear whether lawmakers will agree to the plan before Friday's deadline

By Lisa Mascaro, Tribune Washington Bureau (TNS)

WASHINGTON — Congress ended the latest crisis over funding the Department of Homeland Security on Tuesday after Speaker John A. Boehner switched course, abandoning the GOP’s strategy of trying to tack on restrictions to President Barack Obama’s immigration plan.

Conservatives were outraged that the embattled speaker declined to continue their fight against the immigration actions that many Republicans view as an overreach of executive authority. They staged a series of procedural votes to prevent final approval. But the bill’s final passage allows GOP leadership to move away from a prolonged standoff that threatened the party’s image as Homeland Security funds were set to expire at the end of the week.

The vote was 257-167 after Boehner was forced to leave his conservative flank behind and reach across the aisle for support from Democrats led by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — something Boehner has been reluctant but repeatedly forced to do on major legislation.

“I am as outraged and frustrated as you at the lawless and unconstitutional actions of this president,” Boehner told his majority, as he announced his decision early Tuesday at a private meeting, according to a person in the room not authorized to discuss the session on the record.

But facing another midnight Friday deadline to fund the department or risk a shutdown, giving in was the best course of action, he said.

“I believe this decision — considering where we are — is the right one for this team, and the right one for this country,” Boehner said.

Just 75 Republicans voted to approve the measure; no Democrats opposed it.

Obama was expected to swiftly sign the bill into law. The Senate, under Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), approved the measure last week in a bipartisan vote, leaving Boehner few options. The bill will fund the big Homeland Security Department, which oversees the nation’s vast domestic security and anti-terrorism apparatus, through Sept. 30.

The sudden change of course arrived none too soon for Republican leaders who endured criticism for failing to control their majority now that the party has control of Congress for the first time in eight years.

The strategy of using the funding bill to force Obama to back down on his immigration plan has consumed the first two months of the new Congress, escalating the party’s tough rhetoric against Latinos and other minority groups the party is trying to court in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

That approach failed in the Senate, where Democrats blocked repeated attempts by McConnell to advance the legislation with restrictions on Obama’s plan to protect from deportation up to 5 million immigrants who are in the U.S. illegally.

“Unfortunately, the fight was never won in the other chamber,” Boehner said. “Democrats stayed united and blocked our bill, and our Republican colleagues in the Senate never found a way to win this fight.”

Boehner tried to persuade his rank-and-file to turn their attention to the court fight over Obama’s plan, which was temporarily halted this month by a Texas judge. The administration is fighting the judge’s order.

“The good news is that the president’s executive action has been stopped, for now,” Boehner told Republicans in the closed session. “This matter will continue to be litigated in the courts, where we have our best chance of winning this fight.”

But that offered no salve to the GOP’s conservative flank, which has been dissatisfied with Boehner’s tenure as speaker. They staged a series of procedural maneuvers, including forcing a partial reading of the bill, as a floor fight broke out between Republicans. Some have grumbled that another leader may be better — though they have been unable to coalesce around an alternative choice.

“We need to stand up, use the power of the purse,” said Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY), who led the floor challenge.

“It’s disappointing,” said Rep. Luke Messer (R-IN). “I hoped we’d be able to continue the fight.”

“We just have to keep fighting on all levels to prevent illegal executive amnesty,” added Republican Rep. John Fleming of Louisiana.

A funding cutoff would have furloughed some Homeland Security employees but forced most others to work without pay. The department oversees the Border Patrol, airport screenings and other crucial security programs, and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson had pleaded with Congress to provide stable funding.

More pragmatic Republicans appeared relieved that the potentially damaging episode was over, for now, as they party tries to return to its agenda.

“Having a clean DHS bill will allow us move forward on not only this issue but other issues here in the future,” said Rep. Jeff Denham (R-CA). “My thought has always been that we do not think what the president has done is constitutional, but that is something we should address in an immigration bill.”

AFP Photo

Tags:

73 Comments

  1. JPHALL March 3, 2015

    Once again the Republicans waste time and opportunity. All noise and smoke and no meat.

    Reply
    1. Independent1 March 3, 2015

      And let’s set the record straight on Boehner’s asinine comment: “I am as outraged and frustrated as you at the lawless and unconstitutional actions of this president,” Boehner told his majority,”

      Boehner knows full well that Obama has not edicted anything that 2 previous GOP presidents haven’t edicted (Reagan after he had actually given Amnesty to 3 million illegals):

      —1987. Early efforts in Congress to amend the law to cover family members failed. Reagan’s Immigration and Naturalization Service commissioner announced that minor children of parents granted amnesty by the law would get protection from deportation. Spouses and children of couples in which one parent qualified for amnesty but the other did not remained subject to deportation, leading to efforts to amend the 1986 law.

      —1989. By a sweeping 81-17 vote, the Senate in July voted to prohibit deportations of family members of immigrants covered by the 1986 law. The House failed to act.

      —1990. In February, President George H.W. Bush, acting through the Immigration and Naturalization Service, established a “family fairness” in which family members living with a legalizing immigrant and who were in the U.S. before passage of the 1986 law were granted protection from deportation and authorized to seek employment. The administration estimated up to 1.5 million people would be covered by the policy. Congress in October passed a broader immigration law that made the protections permanent.

      Reply
    2. joe schmo March 5, 2015

      ….yah, that’s because they are going the way of the Democrats. So when you are stating what you say, it’s all going YOUR way. Not ours. You should be so proud. LOL

      Reply
  2. Lynda Groom March 3, 2015

    Still pointing the finger at the President even in another of his own failures. The worst Speaker of The House in generations needed the help of Nancy and the Democrats to accomplish the only logical and reasonable piece of legislation possible. I suppose that his caucas is proud of wasting their time and our money in their self-inflicted crisis in governing style. The gang that can’t shoot straight had to be dragged over the finish line due to their own ineptitude.

    Reply
    1. charleo1 March 3, 2015

      Yep. About 30 or 40 nitwits in the GOP House Caucasus, coming from absolutely untouchable districts, gerrymandered especially by the GOP. Are just having a ball. And putting on a big show for their Obama hating Yahoos back home. And, making a fool out of Boehner, and a dysfunctional mess of the gov. for these low brows, is a bonus. I was listening to guest on one of the shows. The daughter of retire pol Dennis Kucinich. Who reported she had been at a meeting held by the Koch Brothers PAC, “Club For Growth.” And they were urging these gutter rats just yesterday to, “dig in,” on the DHS Bill. Of course that’s all moot today, as Boehner finally realized, they were digging in alright. Digging a hole, that was mainly to bury him, and what’s left of the credibility of the GOP. But the real news here is, this is only the second month of GOP Congressional reign! There’s still a debt ceiling authorization to pass, a bill to fund the government, and keep it open. And well, a lot I don’t know enough to say. But just a lot more of this kind of stuff to come.

      Reply
      1. joe schmo March 5, 2015

        Hasn’t changed has it? We still have the same ole same ole. Nobody’s on the side of the people anymore. The sooner you see that the closer we will be to a better world.

        Reply
        1. charleo1 March 5, 2015

          Yes things have changed a lot in the Republican Party. And not for the better. Beginning with Newt Gingrich, we’ve seen the Right transform itself from a conservative organization that seen it’s primary responsibility to address the core problems of the people, from a business friendly standpoint. Often offering private sector alternatives to Democrat’s more Gov. centered approach. But still recognizing the essential role of gov. From that Party to today, we see a radical win at all cost, militaristic, junta insurgency. Determined to push, and shove their way into positions of power, and unaccountable influence. Their goal not to lead, but to destroy, or allow for others to destroy the foundations of representative gov. and democracy itself. Their attitude seems to be, if that be what it takes, then so be it. In order to believe both side are the same, I would need to believe Al Gore would have used the 9/11 attacks in a like manner as Bush. As an excuse to invaded Iraq, as the first preemptory step into going to war with Iran. Or that a John McCain, or Mitt Romney, had they been elected instead of Barack Obama, wouldn’t have 350,000 combat troops on the ground in Iran as we speak. And maybe the entire Middle East ablaze. And this is that ‘better World’ you think will created when we all realize both sets of ideas, and agendas are all the same set? I would need to believe the World is better off because Bush occupied the office of President. Or would be the same today, if he hadn’t. Or the T-Party, and the extremism on the Right, has overall, been genial, and unremarkable. And neither a positive, nor negative transformation of the Republican Right?

          Reply
      2. joe schmo March 5, 2015

        Hasn’t changed has it? We still have the same ole same ole. Nobody’s on the side of the people anymore. The sooner you see that the closer we will be to a better world.

        Reply
    2. FireBaron March 4, 2015

      I forget which long time Republican politician said this, but it was “Not only are they shooting at their own foot, they are taking the time to aim so they don’t miss.”

      Reply
      1. joe schmo March 5, 2015

        Well, let’s just face it. It’s more of the same.

        Reply
      2. joe schmo March 5, 2015

        Well, let’s just face it. It’s more of the same.

        Reply
    3. joe schmo March 5, 2015

      No need for help from Peloser. She’s just too much of a ditz to have any influence. Reidtard and Peloser only brought us deeper into the quagmire. Unfortunately, the Conservatives have two RINO’s who should have been replaced eons ago. They are no better than the Dems they replaced…. In reality, there’s not much difference.

      Reply
    4. joe schmo March 5, 2015

      No need for help from Peloser. She’s just too much of a ditz to have any influence. Reidtard and Peloser only brought us deeper into the quagmire. Unfortunately, the Conservatives have two RINO’s who should have been replaced eons ago. They are no better than the Dems they replaced…. In reality, there’s not much difference.

      Reply
      1. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

        Our government is of all the people, not just the extremists. There were move votes for democrats total in the last election then for republicans. As I keep saying if 25% of a party is far right wing and the rest are moderates who is the true party? It’s the Tea Party that are the RINO’s. The republican party has never in it’s long history supported the my way or the highway of the new right. Historically it’s the republicans that have taken the democrats programs and made them work. They used to support good government not no government.

        Reply
  3. joe schmo March 4, 2015

    Disgusting!

    Reply
    1. James Bagley March 4, 2015

      Inevitable!

      Reply
  4. James Bowen March 4, 2015

    Let’s hope the courts stop this illegal amnesty, and that Congress can
    find it in themselves to reassert their Constitutional authority in these
    matters.

    Reply
    1. bobnstuff March 4, 2015

      I know words don’t mean much but calling what the President is doing amnesty is like calling a tent a house. It’s only temporary, limited time frame. This is what we do while waiting for congress to act.

      Reply
      1. joe schmo March 5, 2015

        Unfortunately, Bob, we have brain dead Boehner and the ‘Turtle’ at the helm. Both RINO’s. They should have been replaced by people like Gowdy, Issa, Chavitz Not too happy with who is at the helm. Congress has already caved.

        Reply
        1. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

          We need to stop using the passing of bills as a club to hurt the other party. We need clean bills with no riders. We need to stop letting the media misinform the public. We need warning labels on fake news shows telling people that they are not presenting facts. We need to stop electing people who want to castrate Washington instead of working with others for the good of
          the country, moderates not extremists. We need to get big money out of politics. Between Wall St. and K St, we are destroying our country for the sake of quick profit. We have forgotten that this country was reated for the common good of all not just a few.

          Reply
          1. charleo1 March 5, 2015

            A good start would be for newscasters to start warning the public before Republican news conferences, that some of the video, and language used in this clip will be very disturbing to some viewers. Legislation passed by a majority Right Congress, and signed by a Republican President should be required to carry warnings such as. This Bill was written by Exxon-Mobil, and a large Hedge Fund Lobby Firm on Wall Street. And contains irresponsible tax legislation, and other deregulatory measures, that will negatively impact your financial future, and the health your children.

            Reply
          2. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            You do realize that illegal immigration is driven by exactly what you denounce here (K-Street, big money, quick profit, narrow interests, etc.), right?

            Reply
          3. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            Yes do. I’m against illegal immigration. I believe in the rule of law. We have illegal immigration because the law, as it is, can’t be enforced and doesn’t serve the needs of the country.

            Reply
          4. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            This law could be enforced. In fact, it is one of the easiest laws to enforce. The way to do it is to require employers to verify the legal status of their employees with E-Verify, and back these up with SSN-No Matching. Employers would be required to terminate the employment of illegals, and those who refuse would be hammered. That would stop it in 48 hours. Can’t be enforced–poppycock. The interests you complain about just don’t want them to be enforced.

            An immigration policy that serves the national interest would greatly reduce, not increase, legal immigration. We have too many people in this country, as indicated by a number of factors, and we don’t need more. We need less.

            Reply
          5. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            You just said that we need to change the law that makes employers E-verify SS#. Even you are saying the law needs changed ,or should it be done by executive order? As far as to many people in the country, there are jobs that have always gone to immigrants. Try to get a block wall built by someone born in the US. It hasn’t happened in my life time.

            Reply
          6. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            Yes, the law does need to be changed in many respects. I never said it did not. The President is not allowed to mandate E-Verify by executive order (the 1996 law that created E-Verify forbids that), so the law does need to be changed in this case.

            There is no such thing as a job that only immigrants do. See here: http://www.cis.org/are-there-really-jobs-americans-wont-do. There are very few jobs that even have a majority of immigrants doing them, and notice that the few that do also have very high unemployment rates.

            Reply
          7. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            I sell cement block and 98% of the time it’s to contractors who learned English as a second language. I’m not in a high immigrant area.

            Reply
          8. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            That does not mean that there are not Americans who are willing and able to do this job.

            Reply
          9. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            I’ve talked to these guy’s and they tell a story of not being able to hire workers. Many want to retire but don’t want the business they built to die. They hire young guys and they work one day and don’t show up for day two. They pay good wages starting at $15 to $20 per hour for unskilled workers. Americans don’t like hard work anymore.

            Reply
          10. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            I’ve talked to these guy’s and they tell a story of not being able to hire workers. Many want to retire but don’t want the business they built to die. They hire young guys and they work one day and don’t show up for day two. They pay good wages starting at $15 to $20 per hour for unskilled workers. Americans don’t like hard work anymore.

            Reply
          11. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            And you believe everything they say? You don’t think it’s possible that they just want cheap labor? The data I have showed you does not back that up what they are telling you. If Americans don’t like hard work, why do they still mine coal in West Virginia? It does not get much harder than that.

            Reply
          12. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            You don’t know how coal is mined do you, They blast the top off a
            mountain and go in with heavy equipment to take the coal, Tunnel mining is all done with machines, no more pick and shovels. Yes it is hard work but not that hard anymore. The people in West Virginia work in the mines because there are few other jobs you can do with a West Virginia education Also the entire coal industry employees about 141,000 people today, about a half as many as TARGET.

            Reply
          13. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            Average age of a West Virginia coal miner is 55

            Reply
          14. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            So you are telling me that the miners who died in the Sago Mine in January 2006 were not in a hard, dangerous job? This job, even with machines, is as dangerous and unpleasant as it gets, yet Americans will do it because it pays well.

            If employers truly can’t find workers (which I highly doubt), they will just have to offer higher wages. That is how the free market works, after all.

            Reply
          15. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            Dangerous job Yes, Since there is another set of unenforced law Mining isn’t even in the top ten of dangerous job though.

            Reply
          16. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            It is a dangerous, hard, unpleasant job though, and Americans do it. Bottom line: it pays well, so Americans will do it. That is how the market works. If there aren’t enough workers, wages need to go up to attract more workers.

            Reply
          17. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            West Virginia coal miners make between $20 and $24 per hour. Not great pay for the nasty job they do. Greed will keep pay low. Companies make their employees work more instead of paying new hires a real wage. Were I work they need to hire 20 to 30 people , they will be lucky to get half that number but they still won’t raise starting pay.

            Reply
          18. James Bowen March 6, 2015

            At some point, if they want workers, they will have to raise the pay. That is how the free market works. Without so much foreign labor, they would have little choice but to.

            As I recall, the sole survivor of the Sago Mine Disaster was an electrical engineer who took a job in the mines because it pays better. Nonetheless, assuming what you say is true, it just goes to show that Americans will do nasty jobs so long as the pay is worth their time and effort.

            Reply
          19. bobnstuff March 8, 2015

            Most companies have increased their starting wage this year. I follow retail wages and everyone has had to raise their opening wage, most by over 10%.

            Reply
          20. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            Wages typically do rise in any given year, but there is also inflation. Overall, when wages are weighed against inflation, they were basically stagnant for ~35 years before the onset of this recession, and have been utterly miserable since.

            Reply
          21. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            Wages typically do rise in any given year, but there is also inflation. Overall, when wages are weighed against inflation, they were basically stagnant for ~35 years before the onset of this recession, and have been utterly miserable since.

            Reply
          22. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            Wages typically do rise in any given year, but there is also inflation. Overall, when wages are weighed against inflation, they were basically stagnant for ~35 years before the onset of this recession, and have been utterly miserable since.

            Reply
      2. James Bowen March 5, 2015

        Amnesty can certainly be temporary, but the White House has stated it is their intention to make this permanent if at all possible. Whether temporary or permanent, it is still amnesty.

        Congress is under no obligation to act on this. Our system is designed to make “getting nothing done” the default setting.

        Reply
        1. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

          amnesty
          [am-nuh-stee] /ˈæm nə sti/
          noun, plural amnesties.

          1. a general pardon for offenses,
          especially political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.

          2. Law. an act of forgiveness for past
          offenses, especially to a class of persons as a whole.

          3. a forgetting or overlooking of any past
          offense.

          verb (used with object), amnestied,
          amnestying.

          4. to grant amnesty to; pardon.

          Is this what the President is doing? No!
          Can the President make it permanent? No!
          Should the President even have to try to fix a broken immigration? No!
          Has he done something different then other presidents? No! Does the power behind the new republican party want it fixed? No!
          Do we need a new immigration bill to deal with the problems and needs of the 21 century? Yes!
          Will the Congress do it? No!

          Reply
          1. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            What the President has done fits under definition 3. The President isn’t allowed to do this in the first place, yet he is doing it anyway, so it could very well be effectively permanent. No other President has done anything like this regarding immigration (Reagan and Bush issued orders which facilitated the implementation of the IRCA which Congress passed, and their actions covered far, far fewer people).

            You are right that we do need a new immigration bill. We need one that reduces legal immigration by more than 90%, restricts birthright citizenship to the offspring of citizens and legal permanent residents, cracks down on illegal immigration, and eliminates most guest worker programs.

            Reply
          2. bobnstuff March 5, 2015

            Read Independent1 post at the beginning, it sums it up well.
            Bush the 1st did almost the same thing.

            Reply
          3. James Bowen March 5, 2015

            See section 4 of the following: http://www.cis.org/Obama-Deferred-Action-Amnest-Executive-Action-Unconstitutional.
            Those orders facilitated the implementation of a law that Congress passed. This action nullifies laws that Congress passed–big difference. Also, those previous actions affected far, far fewer people.

            Reply
          4. James Bagley March 9, 2015

            Stop lying — there is no amnesty. Amnesty is not temporary. You find the need to lie because Americans do not support anti-American bigoted hate from immigrant-hating European immigrants.

            Americans are mostly immigrants or recent descendents of immigrants, and they support reasonable solutions to the broken immigration system. They do not support the anti-American bigoted hate that you have been spewing.

            Reply
          5. James Bowen March 10, 2015

            The word amnesty comes from the Greek word amnestia, which means forgetfulness. It is the same root word that amnesia comes from. To give someone amnesty is to overlook, or rather forget, their crimes and lawbreaking. They can be temporary or provisional. By giving them workpermits, that certainly meets this definition. Anything that allows them to stay and work, even if only temporarily, meets this definition.

            There is nothing broken about our immigration system, except for enforcement. It is more accurate to say that it has been sabotaged by those who gain from more immigration. There are a lot more Americans who support reducing immigration that increasing it as well as taking an enforcement-only approach to illegal immigration, as I have shown you numerous indications of.

            Reply
          6. James Bagley March 10, 2015

            Look, I’m not really going to debate the meaning of any word with a person who advocates murdering immigrants. I know what the word means. You? Not so much.

            You are wrong about the Klan. Americans do NOT support the KKK. If you really managed to get 100,000 views for your cross-burning videos on YouTube then you would have no trouble providing a link that proves it. Even if you got a large number of views for your Klan rallies, it don’t prove support for your Klan chapter. How many views came from people who do NOT approve of your cross-burnings? How many from law enforcement?

            Reply
      3. beulahmo March 5, 2015

        Indeed. All the huffing and puffing that this is amnesty is enormously dishonest. It’s fiction.

        Here’s the reality: it’s a matter of resources allocation. President Obama’s executive actions represent a prioritization of the job the executive branch is tasked with doing w/r/t undocumented immigrants.

        Everyone knows there are far too many undocumented immigrants in the U.S. for the government to be able to simply apprehend, detain, and deport all of them. As a practical matter, it’s simply too large a task for the limited amount of resources the government has at hand.

        So because of this excess of work over resources available, the President has declared how deportations will be prioritized, from now until such time as the Speaker of the House will allow the bipartisan immigration bill to be voted on (and passed, as it surely will).

        Reply
        1. James Bowen March 6, 2015

          Giving them work permits goes way, way beyond prioritizing deportations. Also, we could get rid of all of the illegals in the U.S. if we actually set about doing so. Eisenhower drove out three million illegals in a matter of months with just 1000 INS agents under the command of a World War II paratrooper. However, a far more efficient way, which would not require any additional personnel or resources, would be to mandate E-Verify and SSN-No Matching and compel employers who have illegals on their payrolls to terminate their employment. Without jobs, they have no reason nor means to stay.

          An amnesty is literally an action that forgets past offenses. In giving them work permits, that is what has happened here.

          Reply
          1. James Bagley March 7, 2015

            You are lying about amnesty because the truth isn’t on your side. Americans don’t support your anti-American hate. Hateful, lying, American-hating European immigrants have no future in this country.

            Reply
          2. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            No, I am not lying. This is amnesty. Also, I have said nothing anti-American.

            Reply
          3. James Bagley March 9, 2015

            You are lying. Amnesty is an official pardon. Pardons are not temporary. There is no amnesty involved here, and the only reason you use the term is because you are trying to inflame bigoted hate. Why would you do that? Because Americans support the same immigration goals as Obama by almost 80% — that’s why.

            Reply
          4. James Bowen March 10, 2015

            The word amnesty comes from the Greek word amnestia, which means forgetfulness. It is the same root word that amnesia comes from. To give someone amnesty is to overlook, or rather forget, their crimes and lawbreaking. They can be temporary or provisional–there is nothing in this definition that precludes this. By giving them work permits, that certainly meets this definition. Anything that allows them to stay and work, even if only temporarily, meets this definition.

            You saying 80% of Americans supporting amnesty (you might not like to call it that, but that’s what it is) does not constitute evidence. You have failed to meet my challenge to show me one shred of evidence to the contrary of the mountains of evidence I have shown you that suggest Americans don’t support legalization at all.

            Reply
          5. James Bagley March 10, 2015

            Listen, I’m not going to debate the meaning English words with a Klan nut. Maybe words mean something different when you and your buddies are dancing around a fiery cross.

            No matter how many hate tweets you count, you cannot get away with advocating the lynching of immigrants. Tweets prove nothing, and lynching people is illegal. Just because you got a lot of likes for your Hitler page on Facebook doesn’t mean Americans support Nazism — it just means that there are a few wacky neo-nazis like you out there running amok. Don’t worry, the law will get around to finding you all, and you won’t have to worry about immigrants ever again.

            Reply
          6. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            No, I am not lying. This is amnesty. Also, I have said nothing anti-American.

            Reply
          7. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            No, I am not lying. This is amnesty. Also, I have said nothing anti-American.

            Reply
    2. James Bagley March 4, 2015

      Stop calling it ‘amnesty’. Amnesty means ‘official pardon’, which is never temporary. Temporary de-prioritizing is not amnesty.

      This was inevitable. America is a country of immigrants, and anti-immigrant hate has always failed. If it hadn’t YOU wouldn’t be here.

      Americans support the same immigration goals as Obama by almost 80%, so you’d better get with the program — it’s a done deal.

      Reply
      1. James Bowen March 5, 2015

        Stop denying it is amnesty. Amnesty literally refers to an act of forgetting. In giving them work permits which they are not entitled to, that is exactly what is going on.

        Nothing is inevitable, as has been demonstrated already.

        Show me evidence, besides push polls that use soft, tricky, deceitful language, that American’s support this. Feedback to Congress indicates that support for this among voters, statistically speaking, is basically zero.

        Reply
        1. James Bagley March 5, 2015

          Stop lying yourself into a straw man argument. There is no amnesty involved, so there is no reason to debate amnesty.

          Amnesty is an official pardon — look it up yourself. Pardons are permanent. Obama’s immigration policies do nothing like this, and Americans support the goals of this policy by almost 80%.

          Reply
          1. James Bowen March 6, 2015

            Where is your evidence that 80% of Americans support it? The feedback Congress receives would suggest that 99.99% of Americans oppose it (I showed you an example).

            An amnesty is literally an action that forgets past offenses. In giving them work permits, that is what has happened here.

            Reply
          2. James Bagley March 6, 2015

            You’ve already seen the evidence, so stop acting like you haven’t. 99.99% bigots sending bigoted feedback to bigoted Congressmen is no surprise to anyone. But most Americans are not bigots, and despicable immigrant-hating European immigrants (read: rednecks) are a tiny minority and getting tinier by the day. The generation that will make Caucasians a minority in the US has already been born, so bigotry and racism has no future in this country. You’d better plan accordingly.

            There is no amnesty involved in any of Obama’s policies. It’s just your attempt to make inflammatory statements because you know that Americans don’t support bigoted hate. It won’t work.

            Reply
          3. James Bowen March 7, 2015

            Amnesty is an action that overlooks past offenses (the word is derived from a Greek word that literally means to forget). Giving them work permits, contrary to existing law, qualifies as this.

            You have not shown any evidence. If so many Americans support amnesty, why are indications of that so conveniently missing in web traffic, Facebook, feedback that members of Congress receive from their constituents, etc.? Why does it only show up in polls taken by groups that promote amnesty and use dishonest language in their polling?

            Reply
          4. James Bagley March 7, 2015

            Amnesty is an official pardon. Official pardons are permanent — not temporary. You are lying because Americans do not support your despicable hate. This is why you try to evoke negative reactions by lying about amnesty. You cannot use the truth because it isn’t on your side, therefore you resort to lying.

            Bigots tweeting hateful tweets and Klan rally YouTube viewings don’t prove anything. You have no proof at all to back up your claims. There are dozens and dozens of credible polls and studies that show that almost 80% of Americans disagree with your despicable hate.

            When somebody must lie repeatedly to argue their points, the points are worthless. Americans do not support your anti-American hate and never will.

            Reply
          5. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            Amnesty is an act of official forgetfulness regarding crimes and offenses. This certainly qualifies. Nothing I have said is hateful.

            Polls are not reliable, and you have shown no evidence outside cooked polls that 80% of Americans support amnesty. Web traffic and Facebook interest are very much indications of how receptive the public is to an argument, and the more immigration groups don’t even compare to the restrictionist groups. There is also Congressional feedback, which is more than 99% in favor of an enforcement-only approach. If what you say is true and what I say is false, surely there must be some indication outside of polls to show this. Show me.

            Reply
          6. James Bagley March 9, 2015

            Amnesty is not ‘forgetfulness’. Amnesty is a permanent, official pardon. There is no pardon involved here, rather, you are simply lying in an attempt to incite negative emotions because you know that Americans don’t support the hateful truth.

            Poll after poll after poll has shown over the last few years that Americans support the same goals as Obama by almost 80%. Americans do NOT support your hateful goals, and that’s why you feel compelled to lie and dismiss dozens of honest and accurate polls on the subject.

            Nobody cares about the handful of hateful bigots shouting bigot-hate to their racist Congressional representatives. People like this are a small, hateful minority who will never get the support of the larger American public. Further, every hateful and despicable attempt to sow the seeds of anti-American hate on real people will push them farther and farther from ever gaining any real power — and they know this.

            All you need for proof is the history of America, the immigrant nation. There have always been hateful bigots and racists who opposed immigration, and they have always lost. That’s how hateful, selfish, hypocritical, anti-American, immigrant-hating European immigrants like you came to be here.

            There is no future for bigoted, anti-immigrant hate in a country of immigrants.

            Reply
          7. James Bowen March 10, 2015

            The word amnesty comes from the Greek word amnestia, which means forgetfulness. It is the same root word that amnesia comes from. To give someone amnesty is to overlook, or rather forget, their crimes and lawbreaking. They can be temporary or provisional. By giving them work permits, that certainly meets this definition. Anything that allows them to stay and work, even if only temporarily, meets this definition.

            You saying 80% of Americans supporting amnesty (you might not like to call it that, but that’s what it is) does not constitute evidence. Polls are unreliable, and regardless of the reliability of polls, if what you are saying is true there should be other indications besides polls. There are none. You have failed to meet my challenge to show me one shred of evidence to the contrary of the mountains of evidence I have shown you that suggest Americans don’t support legalization at all.

            I don’t oppose immigration. I, along with many other Americans, want immigration levels to be set at levels tailored to our national interests, and overpopulation is not in our national interest.

            Reply
          8. James Bowen March 10, 2015

            The word amnesty comes from the Greek word amnestia, which means forgetfulness. It is the same root word that amnesia comes from. To give someone amnesty is to overlook, or rather forget, their crimes and lawbreaking. They can be temporary or provisional. By giving them work permits, that certainly meets this definition. Anything that allows them to stay and work, even if only temporarily, meets this definition.

            You saying 80% of Americans supporting amnesty (you might not like to call it that, but that’s what it is) does not constitute evidence. Polls are unreliable, and regardless of the reliability of polls, if what you are saying is true there should be other indications besides polls. There are none. You have failed to meet my challenge to show me one shred of evidence to the contrary of the mountains of evidence I have shown you that suggest Americans don’t support legalization at all.

            I don’t oppose immigration. I, along with many other Americans, want immigration levels to be set at levels tailored to our national interests, and overpopulation is not in our national interest.

            Reply
          9. James Bagley March 10, 2015

            Look, your claim that Americans support killing all immigrants based on the tweets that you counted on Twitter is absurd and despicable. Even if you did count over 50,000 hate tweets, murder is illegal.

            Your immigrant-execution claim is every bit as ridiculous as your past claims that getting over 100,000 views for your cross burning video on YouTube means that Americans support the KKK. A few wackos watching your Klan videos over and over doesn’t prove anything to me.

            Americans DO NOT support murder. And for the record, they despise the KKK — I don’t care how many ‘views’ you manage to get for your Klan videos. Hate tweets and cross-burning video view counts are not evidence. Besides, you never offered any links to your Klan videos so I can verify that more than 100,000 people really did view your cross-burnings.

            Reply
          10. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            Amnesty is an act of official forgetfulness regarding crimes and offenses. This certainly qualifies. Nothing I have said is hateful.

            Polls are not reliable, and you have shown no evidence outside cooked polls that 80% of Americans support amnesty. Web traffic and Facebook interest are very much indications of how receptive the public is to an argument, and the more immigration groups don’t even compare to the restrictionist groups. There is also Congressional feedback, which is more than 99% in favor of an enforcement-only approach. If what you say is true and what I say is false, surely there must be some indication outside of polls to show this. Show me.

            Reply
          11. James Bowen March 9, 2015

            Amnesty is an act of official forgetfulness regarding crimes and offenses. This certainly qualifies. Nothing I have said is hateful.

            Polls are not reliable, and you have shown no evidence outside cooked polls that 80% of Americans support amnesty. Web traffic and Facebook interest are very much indications of how receptive the public is to an argument, and the more immigration groups don’t even compare to the restrictionist groups. There is also Congressional feedback, which is more than 99% in favor of an enforcement-only approach. If what you say is true and what I say is false, surely there must be some indication outside of polls to show this. Show me.

            Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.