Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While a lot of people here choose to attack conservatives rather than get to the real issue, our objective is supposed to be protecting the borders. Securing them. The role of any President, as required by our U.S. Constitution, is to secure and protect our nation's borders. Your precious and lawless "president" is not committed to this. He wants illegals and potential terrorists entering our country for Dems to win more votes (steal elections, in other words) and to make America less safe.
There is a bill which would authorize money to build the fence (double & triple fence at hot spots), and boost the number of border patrol, authorize use of National Guard, add electronic surveillance etc, but the Congress refuses to vote on it. Money was already authorized to build 700 miles of fence, and the money was spent to build 700 miles, but the border is a heck of a lot longer than that.
If the objective was to protect the border, then this bill would have been passed over a year ago, but the Congress refuses to vote on it. Clearly the objective is to deny the funds to protect the border, and then use the border situation to play political football. Both sides should be upset with that objective, but the commentary here proves people are happy as long as they have someone to blame for the problem. No one seems interested in fixing the issue.
You can't say "here is five bucks, now make sure the border is secure". Some people are dumb enough to think president can pull money out of his ass, but most people know the Congress authorizes spending.
It's sad the left will support, supporting bringing in non-American chlidren (yea...who wear size 6XXXX underwear) yet they won't support feeding our American children.
It's sad the left will support, supporting bringing in non-American chlidren (yea...who wear size 6XXXX underwear) yet they won't support feeding our American children.
Why does the left hate American children?
Strange, I do not see any Libs saying lets bring in more non-American children, and as for supporting and feeding our children it is the Cons that oppose free school meals and all social welfare programs such as food stamps that help feed poor American children. So it seems that either someone here is very confused or has issues with the truth, take your pick folks
It's sad the left will support, supporting bringing in non-American chlidren (yea...who wear size 6XXXX underwear) yet they won't support feeding our American children.
And what was Cruz trying to stop? Could it be the funding authorization that the House last year refused to give to the President's "Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals" program, which started as a memorandum for prosecutorial discretion, but is basically the Dream Act for any illegal under 31? Why yes...yes it could be just that. No legislation, just marching orders to DHS and INS to not proceed with any immigration proceedings if the person meets a set of criteria. In other words, amnesty via the stroke of a pen. He not only waives existing federal law, but House and Senate Dems keep trying to get funding for the estimated half million illegals amnestied via this "memorandum".
That's what Cruz was railing against, because Boehner had acquiesced and included funding for, thus implicit agreement with and approval of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. Had they signed yesterday's bill, every Republican in the House that would have voted yes would have been exactly guilty of voting yes to giving and funding amnesty. Period.
Cruz was politically brave because he knows he can be. He saved the House GOP's bacon on this one, and they know it and so does he. He gave them the scapegoat (himself) to allow them to back away from something baked in an "emergency measure" that would have been all the campaign rope needed to hang them.
And besides the annual attempt to trick the Republicans into voting yea on amnesty, the rest of the emergency measure was just undocumented budget bloat in the name of political expediency. DHS, INS, Border Patrol...all of them have budgets, money, etc. Their issue is a boss who changes their job description every 5 minutes, so none of them know which wa y is up, while an invading force is overwhelming our southern frontier. Giving more money to make the invading army's first few weeks in occupied America a little more comfortable is not what I'd call an emergency.
You are correct, as far as you go. The rest of the story is that Mr Obama's campaign "Dreamers" EO screwed the pooch, by giving the false impression that 'permisos' were available for any who could complete the journey. Much like the race hustlers do, the coyotes did and their own messaging to pump up their business income. Don't be naive.
No doubt, there are some, maybe many of these children that qualify for refugees status. But, that truth is impossible to sort out with the complicating campaign move by Mr Obama.
Right now, there are limited controls on our Southern border. It is just a matter of time, before something - like a antibiotic resistant TB, or other type of epidemic, a bomb(s), terrorists, vicious gangs {Chicago anyone?} - with tragic consequences gets through this sieve. We are not talking if, but when.
Take off your partisan blinders. This is a complex issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smash255
William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Action Act of 2008
Boehner could bring the Senate Bill to the House floor, it would pass and we would be done with at least this border nonsense. But, Boehner would have to get the real House Speaker, Cruz, to agree.
The Senate Bill couldn't even pass the Senate. Obama said he would Veto the House Bill.
These two bills are 3 Billion dollars apart in funding - 3 Billion is a little more than a rounding error.
Strange, I do not see any Libs saying lets bring in more non-American children, and as for supporting and feeding our children it is the Cons that oppose free school meals and all social welfare programs such as food stamps that help feed poor American children. So it seems that either someone here is very confused or has issues with the truth, take your pick folks
Oh well, enough stuipd crap has been talked about the right...why not a little about the left with nothing to back it up either...
And you called me out, but what about your buddy florida bob....he called the right, hamas, do you agre with that, or are you showing that it's O.K. for the left to do it, but not the right and NOT calling him out?
So it seems that either someone here is very confused or is so blindly partisan, they fail to see there own doing the same thing they are accusing me of doing, take your pick folks
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
