Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CANNON CRUSHES JACOB

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • boyan
    replied
    Unfortunately AF1 I cant agree with you. Enforcement only will never pass the Senate. The same way the current Senate bill can never pass the Republican controlled House. If there is no GWP there is no bill and if there is no enforcement first there is also no bill. IF there is a compromise before November it will be in the lines of Enforcement first and after 2 years GWP. Path to citizenship is very questionable but if they can agree on it it will look like "leave the county and then get you citizenship after many years of wait". Now another way this immigration reform can play out is if no bill gets voted before the elections and then the Dem. take over the house. If this happen then get ready to see a bill that resembles the Senate version sometime next year. Finally your scenario can only come true if the republicans are able to keep the House. Then YES you'll be right.

    Leave a comment:


  • Antifascist1
    replied
    I know real life has nothing to do with logic , but here is my idle contemplation:

    Suppose Senate and House agree to pass Enforce First - Amnesty Next legislation.

    How would it be implemented?

    I mean, if I was Immigration Enforcement employee, how would it motivate me to enforce the law against illegal presence knowing well that the law amnestying those evry same people whom I am to deport has already passed - but to implemented in the second stage of the process?
    Am I supposed to play lottery then, put like names of 1000 illegals in my hat and draw few every day? Knowing that those whom I don't pull will get legal status? How would it work, really?

    This would be very absurd deal though you can't completely exclude the possibility of such.

    The most likely course of events, as I stated before , is that "Enforcement Only" advocating falks will preveail in passing legislation they want- if not before then after November.
    Even if they talk about enacting GWP later as a matter of fact they have no intentions of doing so.

    Once "EO" legislation passess it will run out of steam and eventually result in failure of objectives - in few years from now.
    All the while it will become more and more popular.

    Some time later, as a result of unpopularity and unfeasibility the push will grow to pass full amnesty.
    Pendulum will make a full swing and result in unconditional amnesty of millions of illegals who will still remain here by the time of enactment of such legislation.

    As I said, real life has nothing to do with logic - either way.

    Leave a comment:


  • jean2005
    replied
    Yes i heard specter and mccain say they would bewilling to let enforcement go first, but for me, it doesnt matter sonce i live in a sanctuary city, so i would easily be able to wait out for the amnesty to start after a year of enforcement.

    If you listen to mccain and specter, they made it clear that they would only make a deal like that if they are guaranteed that amnesty will kick in..no biggy for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Antifascist1
    replied
    What is so big deal about incumbent winning the nomination to run for his seat in Utah that gets some of you "pro-immigrants" too excited?

    As long as proportions of opponents vs. supporters of GWP remain the same (and that's what it will be as long as all/most incumbents get re-elected) nothing will change.

    Under current circumstances "nothing will change" means the same House would remain which will either:

    1. Enact Enforcement Only Bill or
    2. Enact Nothing.

    The rest is B.S.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hudson
    replied
    Iperson, Listen to this then shut your money maker. JUMPING THE BORDER IS CRIMINAL. BEING HERE W/OUT PROPER DOCUMENTS IS CRIMINAL. Please don't make me repeat myself. Idiot.
    Cite the specific code that states it is a criminal offense. It is not. It is a civil statue with consequences for violating the statue. If it was criminal, it would have to be done via a court of law with all protections under the USC.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hudson
    replied
    Mrs. Hudson, You are way off!! Please don't post things that are not true!!
    No, call me mister, BOY.

    Actually, what I posted was pretty much accurate if you analyze the polls in its entirity.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pegasus
    replied
    Iperson, Listen to this then shut your money maker. JUMPING THE BORDER IS CRIMINAL. BEING HERE W/OUT PROPER DOCUMENTS IS CRIMINAL. Please don't make me repeat myself. Idiot.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pegasus
    replied
    Mrs. Hudson, You are way off!! Please don't post things that are not true!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Hudson
    replied
    I am holding the link right now!! Do you still want to see it!! LOL LO
    The only poll that means anything is election day final tally. However, the polls that you are probably citing offer a dualistic approach. Americans want BOTH a stonger enforement AND helping the illegals already here. However, polls have shown that helping the illegals obtain legal status generally falls short of "earned citizenship."

    Leave a comment:


  • Hudson
    replied
    I wonder if either Jean or iperson happened to notice today's news that Specter, McCain, and Kennedy are now saying they are willing to consider staged amnesty, in which enforcement would come first, with amnesty after. The very thing in one of the amendments they wouldn't consider only a few weeks ago. Apparently, they don't share your optimism about the implications of Cannon's nomination.
    This is poltiical doubletalk. Normally, when a Congressman/woman wants to initiate a psss this and then will pass something later. The only way for this to work is for both leaderships to intiate an "official" contract to set up the passing of the House Bill first and then the Senate Bill. The House could amend the Senate bill by elimating the earned citizenship but retaining the guest worker program only. This way, illegals may still be able to adjudicate into legal status, but avoid the contrersy of :"earned citizenship."

    Leave a comment:


  • Pegasus
    replied
    AF1, I take back the Tubesteak comment. It would be way more appropriate for Iperson and Boyan. I think they are G*A*Y. Aliba really brings up some good points!! What is happening is that the American people are fed up with this Illegal activities of all of these border jumpers!!

    Leave a comment:


  • AliBA
    replied
    I wonder if either Jean or iperson happened to notice today's news that Specter, McCain, and Kennedy are now saying they are willing to consider staged amnesty, in which enforcement would come first, with amnesty after. The very thing in one of the amendments they wouldn't consider only a few weeks ago. Apparently, they don't share your optimism about the implications of Cannon's nomination.

    Leave a comment:


  • Antifascist1
    replied
    Actually what 'Jean' thinks (but doesn't say) is that F.A.I.R. victorious

    P.S. There you go : F A R T. & F A I R sound similar !

    Leave a comment:


  • Pegasus
    replied
    Jean thinks a F*A*R*T is a victory!!!

    Leave a comment:


  • Antifascist1
    replied
    'Jean' is nothing but a "straw man".
    I have long ago known what is to be expected and shared my opinion too.
    Nothing has changed since - no indications that anything will happen other than what I foresaw.

    Leave a comment:

Sorry, you are not authorized to view this page

Home Page

Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

EB-5

移民日报

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Questions/Comments

SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily



Working...
X