[Jameison]

"Ah, so because of Chamberlain's failure to recognize Hitler's ambitions, that should be our cue that the Republican House should not negotiate with the Republican Senate? "

Because Chamberlain was desperate to sign an agreement at all costs, so he signed a bad one, with devastating consequences for everyone later.
We should not sign a bad Senate Bill just because we "need" to get an immigration bill at all costs (there was a time when an attempt was made to panic everyone into getting bill signed by November's elections at all costs. Luckily the Republican House members weren't buying that crap).
We should have a new immigration bill because its the right immigration bill for Americans.
Otherwise, no new immigration bill.

[MACVSOG68]

We should not sign a bad Senate Bill just because we "need" to get an immigration bill at all costs (there was a time when an attempt was made to panic everyone into getting bill signed by November's elections at all costs. Luckily the Republican House members weren't buying that crap).

Uh the issue is not "signing" a bad Senate bill. The issue is whether to attempt a conference. But again, that pint sized brain of mine is still trying to grasp the benefits of status quo with no border controls and no new enforcement.

We should have a new immigration bill because its the right immigration bill for Americans.

Yes, and you and a handful of others know exactly what's right for America. Screw the polls, we really don't care what Americans think about it (unless they agree with us). /S