Posted on 08/04/2013 10:43:09 AM PDT by Mozilla
It all ***sounds*** good, especially to allow states to enforce the law. BUT...two things...
first read the post above yours and you should note that the conference committee can take out all the language about letting states enforce... and so your approval goes pffft!
Second, even if by some wild fantasy Reid and Obama LA were to let it pass with state enforcement, Holder would find some slimy way to get his Fed force enforcing and telling states to back off.
NO BILL, NADA, ZIP, ZILCH, UNTIL CONSERVATIVES CONTROL THE HOUSE, SENATE AND WHITE HOUSE!!!
And Bohner can easily pass the Senate bill with no conference bill, as he did with VAWA and the tax bill. I recall many claims that just saying ‘no’ against those would stop them.
Well Obama signed the Senate bill's ‘as is’ in both cases. Empty claims.
Opposing a bill that just gives the states the right to enforce Federal immigration laws without the SCOTUS interference when Obama wont is the same as joining LaRaza. We might as well be Dems.
Go explain to Jan Brewer why we must side with Obama and Holder and LaRaza against AZ.
I figure 2016 will either be Rubio or Christie, do they count?
I think you figure wrong this time around. The GOPe will try to hoist up Rubio/Christie/Jeb the Bush but I think Palin and others will stop them cold.
You mean like they did Romney last year?
That bothers me too. We know that Nappy said she could ignore parts of laws she didn't like. Rogue judges could also zap parts of immigration laws they don't like. In 1976 the SCOTUS ruled unanimously that US Civil Service regulations that required citizenship for some jobs were unconstitutional.
And it's not just Dem POTUSes who have such extraordinary compassion for illegals. GWB's DHS stopped arresting illegal aliens just before the 2008 election to avoid arresting Obama's illegal aunt.
I don't want Obama to sign any immigration bill either, but seems to me that on immigration, GWB was worse than Clinton.
Time to rename him, Congressman Paul Rymney.
Pass supermax border security and fund a mass deportation machine.
Call it the “Dream On” act.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday struck down key parts of an Arizona law that sought to deter illegal immigration, but let stand a controversial provision allowing police to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws.
In a decision sure to ripple across the political landscape in a presidential election year, the court’s 5-3 ruling upheld the authority of the federal government to set immigration policy and laws.
“The National Government has significant power to regulate immigration,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion. “Arizona may have understandable frustrations with the problems caused by illegal immigration while that process continues, but the State may not pursue policies that undermine federal law.”
I have never liked Cantor. He is a whiney spokesperson and a disingenuous loser. I cringe when he speaks.
Face it, we only have a few who represent their constituents, and he isn’t one of them. Most of them do what they want to do and ignore the people because “they know better”.
So much for the 10th amendment.
The 1960s Voting Rights Act put states under the heel of the Federal government, with the section recently rejected being the worse only applying to Red states.
And it was the GOP House, Senate and White House that re-authorized it in 2006.
Which GOP candidate would have done better than Romney did last time out?
What does that have to do with my response :#25 that you just replied to? I dont see the connection.
I am sure we will be lectured that Christie will do the best against a Dem in 2016, after he wins re-election with all those Dem and swing voters.
” but seems to me that on immigration, GWB was worse than Clinton. “
GWB was FAR worse than Clinton. Research it, and run the numbers. Compared to George W (amnesty) Bush, Clinton was pretty good.
” Opposing a bill that just gives the states the right to enforce Federal immigration laws without the SCOTUS interference when Obama wont is the same as joining LaRaza. We might as well be Dems.
Go explain to Jan Brewer why we must side with Obama and Holder and LaRaza against AZ. “
B U M P!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
