Tuesday May 3, 2016
Jump to content
I have been attempting to read and understand the gist of the immigration bill proposed by the "Gang of Eight", including Flake and McCain. One source stated that a part of the bill calls for controlling the Border as a first step. Today's A. Republic said nothing about the Border. It appears that the bill would not allow current illegals to "jump the line" ahead of those who are here legally and have followed the procedures to apply for citizenship. I do not know if that applies to the Dream kids. It has other provisions that are interesting, including exceptions for highly skilled persons and labor needed to fill jobs unfilled by American workers. This proposal will be followed by Obama's proposal in several days time.The McCain/Flake proposal is bi-partisan and has 4 Democrats and 4 Republicans as sponsors. It looks very interesting and workable. It also seems a reasonable way to deal with a thorny problem that plagues us all. Thoughrts?
No exceptions for highly skilled persons or labor needed to fill jobs unfilled by American workers. When all legal Americans have a job, then maybe. When all the unemployment checks and welfare checks stop and are not needed for Americans then maybe.
Until then kick them out any way that is necessary. That includes the kids that went to school here.
No welfare or any freebies for the illegals.
Lawyers make up the majority of the Democrats in Washington. The most widely recognized exception to evidence provided in the court is that "fruit of a poisened tree is not...NOT...admissable. " Therefore, If parents who are not legal residents of this country, bring children into this country illegally, there is no way that the children can be excused from the crime of their parents. They go home and do it right.
I know that strikes up ire on the part of libs but consider this.
If the children go home, and take with them the resolute firmness of the righteousness of law and how it effects everyone 'blindly' then maybe they can make their own country better.
Isn't that what we did... a couple of centuries ago?
Dan; If a child is brought to the U.S. when very young, that child absorbs the culture and values of the surroundings. The children become "Americanized" much more than the parents. The thought comes to me that taking now adult offspring of illegal immigrant parents and sending them to the country of origen may totally disrupt their lives. It is likely to not do the birth country good, not do the person good, and not do the U.S. good. A more compassionate and thoughtful approach is needed.
"Lawyers make up the majority of the Democrats in Washington."
Mr. Haapala posted the above.
The following is also true. I only had to modify one word to post it!!
Lawyers make up the majority of the Republicans in Washington.
I didn't even have to bother to check the accuracy of my statement.
I'm not JUST referring to "elected" republicans. There are strategists and lobbyists and other republicans of all stripes hanging out in DC right along with all those democratic lawyers!!
Mr. Jones; Although I am not a fan of liberals in general and liberal lawyersin particular, I do not understand your point.
The simple point is Mr. Lemon, that (just like the Democrats in Washington), the Republicans in Washington ALSO are comprised of a vast majority of lawyers.
If "lawyers" is a dirty word, then it follows that Republican lawyers are no different than Democratic lawyers, and as BOTH parties consist of a "majority" of lawyers, well then...........
could it be that BOTH parties are to be suspected???
I did NOT use the word "liberal" anywhere in my post.
What's not to understand??
Mr. Jones: I understand perfectly. Your concept indicates a rather simplistic and predujiced point of view : Lawyers in Congress are suspect. Although I do not hold Congress in any position of esteem, I certainly will not go so far as your remark indicates that you do. In fact, I believe that some of the lawyers in Congress do well. I suggest that all of us should demand accountability and judge those in Congress based on actions. The same applies to all lawyers and, in fact, all people.
MY remark had NOTHING to do with lawyers. It is re-quoted below:
"could it be that BOTH parties are to be suspected???"
The remark was aimed at the two parties.
I indicated only that lawyers are abundant in BOTH parties.
Re-read the entire thread. Comprehension should follow!!
Unless it is way too simplistic for you. :-)
Mr. Jones; It probably is so I won't.
Robert and John,
You will be sent to your rooms if you don't play nice. (:
I have found that if you read a post a couple of times before you answer, it helps.
Have a nice day.
Posting comments requires a free account