PDA

View Full Version : Days after election, Republicans start push for amnesty for illegals



AndreaGail
9th November 2012, 06:39 PM
surprise surprise, the two biggest "conservative" personalities supporting this...neo con and a jew


The Player: House Speaker John Boehner

The Play: Moving to the middle on immigration

The Strategy: Republicans paid a steep price at the ballot box Tuesday when Hispanics broke almost three-to-one for President Barack Obama, providing further evidence that the GOP has a problem reaching one of the nation's fastest-growing voting blocs.

Mr. Boehner took a big step aimed at reversing that trend this week when he signaled his support for a "comprehensive approach" to overhauling the country's immigration laws. Mr. Boehner didn't say so explicitly, but the "comprehensive'' label often refers to legislation that, among other things, would take the contentious step of granting legal status to many people currently in the country illegally.

Mr. Boehner's comments—coupled with an about-face by conservative pundit Sean Hannity and support from columnist Charles Krauthammer—marked a watershed for a party that, with a few exceptions, has drawn a hard line against illegal immigration and on policies affecting undocumented immigrants already in the U.S.

During the Republican presidential primaries, Mitt Romney had shored up support among party conservatives by drawing contrasts with his opponents on immigration. He criticized Texas Gov. Rick Perry for providing in-state college tuition benefits to people who came to the U.S. illegally and blasted former House Speaker Newt Gingrich for backing a pathway to permanent residency for some undocumented residents.

On Election Day, Hispanic voters sided with Mr. Obama 71% to 27%, according to national exit polls.

Mr. Boehner's comments come as part of a post-election media blitz to present the Republican Party as a more-willing negotiating partner with the White House and Democrats. In addition to saying he would take up an immigration overhaul, the House speaker signaled an openness to raising tax revenue—though not individual rates—to help pare the federal deficit. He also seemed to turn his back on the small-government activists of the tea party when he told ABC News, "We don't have a tea-party caucus to speak of in the House."

Former President George W. Bush had prodded his Republican majorities in the House and Senate to enact a sweeping immigration overhaul during his second term. That effort was derailed by conservatives in his own party, who refused to allow Congress to create a pathway to permanent residency for the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants already here.

Mr. Boehner declined to shed further light on his plans for an immigration bill during a news conference Friday. "I'm not talking about a 3,000-page bill," he said. "What I'm talking about is a common-sense, step-by-step approach that would secure our borders, allow us to enforce the laws and fix a broken immigration system," he said.

Prodded on whether this included a pathway to citizenship, Mr. Boehner, chuckling, said, "I'm not going to get into any of the details of how you would get there. It's just time to get the job done."

The Result: The need to overhaul immigration laws has emerged as a rare area of agreement among leaders in both parties. The president wants to reward one of the voting blocs that helped him secure a second term, and Republicans are eager to make inroads with a constituency that seems to be moving away from them.

What's unclear is whether rank-and-file House Republicans are ready to follow Mr. Boehner's lead. Conservative Republicans forced party leaders to scuttle an earlier bid to rewrite immigration laws, arguing that a path to permanent residency would reward bad behavior.

Virginia Rep. Bob Goodlatte, who is expected to take the reins at the House Judiciary Committee next year, counts himself among those opponents. Illegal immigration "mocks the law," a passage on Mr. Goodlatte's official House website reads. "We must not grant amnesty to individuals who have broken our laws."

—Patrick O'Connor
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324073504578109352503851338.html

steyr_m
9th November 2012, 07:37 PM
Yeah, they can "push for amnesty", it doesn't matter. "People of Colour" will always go Dem. because they dole out more freebies. Amazing they will sell out their core-voters like that.

JDRock
9th November 2012, 07:41 PM
Yeah, they can "push for amnesty", it doesn't matter. "People of Colour" will always go Dem. because they dole out more freebies. Amazing they will sell out their core-voters like that.

indeed! was it not the republicans who freed the blacks,only to be repaid with hatred??

collector
9th November 2012, 07:51 PM
Yeah, they can "push for amnesty", it doesn't matter. "People of Colour" will always go Dem. because they dole out more freebies. Amazing they will sell out their core-voters like that.

Repubs sold out their country years ago, and have no problem selling their votes to the highest corporate bidder. Repub or Demoncrat ~ makes no difference, in the end they're all empty suits lining their own persona nests

AndreaGail
9th November 2012, 07:59 PM
I just find it funny that all the flag waving patriotards think these are the people (repubs) that are "going to get this country back on the right track"

steyr_m
9th November 2012, 08:11 PM
Repubs sold out their country years ago, and have no problem selling their votes to the highest corporate bidder. Repub or Demoncrat ~ makes no difference, in the end they're all empty suits lining their own persona nests

Agreed -- can anyone else agree that Civil War 2 is unfolding?

steyr_m
9th November 2012, 08:13 PM
I should say "Civil War". What we know as "The Civil War" is erroneously named. It should have been called "The War of Southern Succession"

Shami-Amourae
9th November 2012, 08:51 PM
I think things like the Free State project should be done, but move to specific states like Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana (maybe Utah too, though the Mormon thing is tied in the the Illuminati closely.) Reclaim these states and go from there. This has to be where Patriots start an online movement/awareness and grouping together more and more. Capture things locally, don't focus on the national level as much, that will never be saved. Stop worrying about things at the national level.

Movements like alt-market.com (http://www.alt-market.com/groups) have the right idea I think, but need more exposure. I've been working with these groups already, and hopefully after winter I can make a real decision for my life finally.

Pay close attention to demographics. You want places that naturally have high levels of white people. States like Texas will be mostly brown very soon, and be completely lost like California is. Expect states like Texas and Arizona to become a Blue State in a matter of years.

Percent White Population by County:
http://www.statjump.com/media/images/maps/white-population-dp1c52-map.jpg

sirgonzo420
9th November 2012, 10:52 PM
I should say "Civil War". What we know as "The Civil War" is erroneously named. It should have been called "The War of Southern Succession"

Or "The War of Northern Aggression".

Horn
10th November 2012, 12:12 AM
And the benefits to living & paying taxes within the Union are what exactly?

steyr_m
10th November 2012, 05:35 PM
Or "The War of Northern Aggression".

Agreed. Either way, it wasn't a "civil war". A civil war is 2+ groups fighting over control of a central govt., not one group wanting to leave.