Posted on 07/15/2014 5:05:51 AM PDT by cotton1706
Conservative talk radio host Laura Ingraham said that pro-amnesty Republicans like Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) who voted for the Senate's amnesty bill are also to blame for the current border crisis.
On Fox News Sunday, Ingraham said the message from many pro-amnesty Republicans has been, "you will be able to stay here."
"Republicans are not off the hook," she said. "If John Boehner had taken this comprehensive reform off the table early on, I don't think he probably would have had as many unaccompanied minors coming here now."
Ingraham emphasized that the "the general sense of that is deportation won't happen even if Republicans are in charge" and the illegal immigrant children will "be able to stay here, go to public schools, get Obamacare."
And on Monday, Ingraham, who was instrumental in powering Dave Brat to his shocking upset over House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), announced that she was "all in for Joe Carr" against Alexander in next month's primary. Carr has closed the gap and trails Alexander by just seven points in a recent poll conducted by a pro-Carr group.
"I'm all in for Joe Carr," Ingraham said on her show. "I think... he's no nonsense, a citizen legislator he'll be and he'll be someone who will actually listen to the people. Politicians at some point do have to listen to the concerns of the people, not just the concerns of one or two, big, fat, interest groups like either LaRaza or the Chamber of Commerce. The people still count, don't they Lamar?"
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Mere “children.”
“And dude, get your facts straight.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/18/border-fence-amendment_n_3461456.html
“The border amendment proposed by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) failed 39-54, with “nay” votes coming from the entire “gang of eight” — which includes Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who famously said in a 2010 ad that the government should “complete the danged fence,” and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who has called for more border protections in his own bill.”
McCain, Graham, Flake and Rubio. And this doesn’t even include the vote in 2007 to defund and gut the Border Fence Act.
The bill was written by the Gang of 8 (acutally by immigration lawyers and La Raza), which included four Republicans--Rubio, McCain, Flake, and Graham .
Of course it is impacting the current situation. The Senate approved amnesty and the pressure is on the House to do something similar. It increases expectations that an amnesty is on the horizon. Boehner and the principles on immigration that came out on January 30 from their three day retreat provides for amnesty.
The principles say "undocumented immigrants" can legally live and work in the country if they register with the federal government and are "willing to admit their culpability." They must pass a "rigorous" criminal background check, pay "significant" fines and back taxes, learn English and civics and prove they can support themselves without government assistance. This is amnesty.
Boehner and a number of GOP congressmen, mainly from California and FL, have been pushing for amnesty thru statements and deed. Jeff Denham, supported by Cantor, introduced the ENLIST bill to allow illegal aliens to join the military and receive citizenship. GOP donors sent a letter to the House requesting amnesty.
And the big fear now is that the Gang of 8 bill could be attached to the Obama request for funds when it goes to conference. And McCaul has already suggested that the bad border bill that came out of his committee should be voted on in the House. The GOPe wants amnesty as bad as the Dems. They view it as a bargaining chip to double the guest worker programs, something included in the Gang of 8 bill.
Anyone who suggests that the Gang of 8 bill is not playing a role in the border crisis is ignorant on the issue. Obama's June 2012 backdoor amnesty for Dreamers is the most influential action that started the migration of unaccompanied minors rolling. Many of these illegal aliens are joining their illegal alien parents and relatives in the US in anticipation of a Gang of 8 bill amnesty. What many people may not know is that if an amnesty passes, tens of millions of family members will be joining their parents and spouses thru chain migration, i.e., family reunification. There are no limits on children and spouses who will be allowed to join their US sponsor almost immediately.
The churches have been contracted by the Federal government and are being paid huge amounts of money for these services. They have been co-opted, which is why most of the large church organizations support amnesty. They see this as a way to get more folks in the pews.
Okay, so four Repubs, not 2. Big deal.
I used to appreciate her advocacy of Conservatism without being directly involved in candidate advocacy.
There is too much at stake not to get involved. Alexander was one of fourteen GOP Senators who voted for the Gang of 8 bill, which will triple legal immigration to 33 million over the next decade and double guest worker programs to 1.4 million a year--all at a time when 21 million Americans are underemployed or unemployed. He needs to be defeated. I suggest you read the following study from the Eagle Forum:
How Mass (Legal) Immigration Dooms a Conservative Republican Party
“The churches have been contracted by the Federal government and are being paid huge amounts of money for these services. They have been co-opted, which is why most of the large church organizations support amnesty. They see this as a way to get more folks in the pews.”
Fools; they can come to my town and see the storefront churches set up by these people. They have no use for the church, unless it will educate their children. We’re closing churches now, and this is happening in an area that is more “Catholic” than it was fifty years ago.
Immigration is the WHOLE ball of wax! Forget everything else! Amnesty at any level will sink this country for generations.
The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, Alabama, and Arizona proving that it does.
That I agree with, that proponents will create a false choice. I also think on the other side, there is an element of "deport them all now" folks who fail to recognize the logistical impossibilty of that, not to mention the fact that once this started happening - which it won't - people now in favor of deport would recoil when they realized how many members of their church, little league, PTA, etc, are impacted. My only point is that many who jump in with Laura on this, do not actually agree with Laura on much of this.
Even Hillary and Obama voted for the bill, which was just before the 2006 midterms The elections resulted in the loss of Congress for the GOP. It was Kay Bailey Hutchinson who helped amend the law a year later that effectively neutered it. The Secure Fence Act was was passed for the optics it provided before the midterms. There is no real support for actually securing the border. It is just obligatory, meaningless political rhetoric.
Understood….but I think we can all agree that there is much more focus and much more information on these issues now than in 2006. That’s a long time ago on this issue, which really started bubbling around 2005 I think.
Having said that, nothing good ever comes from Peter King. He’s even worse now than he was in 06.
And again, my narrow point here was that Ingraham is wrong in her equivalency, not her main philsophy. Dante indicated that hell has strata based on severity of crime. I think our scorn should too…..that’s all I’m saying.
The "deport them all now folks" are small in number and certainly no one in Congress is saying that. Attrition thru enforcement or as Romney less than artfully said, self-deportation, should be the response. Otherwise, if you conclude like you do that the logistics and politics are too difficult to overcome, you are left with only one choice--a blanket amnesty like we had in 1986.
Any legislation that allows the lawbreakers to stay and work here, the object of their crimes, is amnesty. So what would you do with the 12 to 20 million who are here "in the shadows" or "members of their church, little league, PTA, etc.?"
The "deport them all now folks" are small in number and certainly no one in Congress is saying that. Attrition thru enforcement or as Romney less than artfully said, self-deportation, should be the response. Otherwise, if you conclude like you do that the logistics and politics are too difficult to overcome, you are left with only one choice--a blanket amnesty like we had in 1986.
Any legislation that allows the lawbreakers to stay and work here, the object of their crimes, is amnesty. So what would you do with the 12 to 20 million who are here "in the shadows" or "members of their church, little league, PTA, etc.?"
Blacks support him 98 percent and always will. And he's no "traitor", but a hero in their eyes. Like when Bob Dole spoke of "Democrat wars" and later tried in vain to declare FDR was one of his "heroes."
Why doesn’t Congress use the following to solve the border problem? This is from the Constitution.
Congress shall:
To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;
“Why doesn’t Congress use the following to solve the border problem? This is from the Constitution.”
1. because the Congress likes this happening
2. If the House passed something, the Senate wouldn’t
3. If the House and Senate came together and did something, the president would veto it.
It is a Congressional power!
“It is a Congressional power!”
Yes, but the Congress does not work in a vacuum. And they must do things BY LAW.
The Congress can “provide for a militia,” they can create a militia, and they can create an army, but only by law.
The Congress has absolutely no authority to send troops or people of any type on it’s own. That function is vested in the Executive, as it should be.
During the Cleveland Administration, the Congress was going to declare war on Spain. Cleveland said, go ahead, but I won’t send the Army or Navy.
Yes, the Congress has power but it only has the power to make law on its own if it has the numbers to override the executive, and even then, the president cannot be compelled to act.
bump
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.