| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 09/07/2017 5:23:29 PM PDT by Religion Moderator, reason:
Duplicate |
Posted on 09/07/2017 2:17:08 AM PDT by Altura Ct.
We already tried amnesty once. The 1986 amnesty under Reagan was supposed to be a one-time fix. We’d forgive the estimated 1 million illegal aliens living here and, in exchange, draconian measures would be imposed on any employer ever caught hiring an illegal again — up to a $10,000 fine per illegal and jail time for repeat offenders.
We never got the employer sanctions.
There weren’t 1 million illegals — it was 4 million.
The only question is: Will anyone in Washington ever listen?
Washington answers to the money. We, who oppose illegal immigration, don’t contribute to them. C of C and big business, etc. do.
They are too weak to stand with us.
I will never understand why the GOP would let the Rats import voters.
Vote for someone with a record? Annie, baby... you gotta listen to Dr. Laura... a ring and a date, or its just pillow talk.
Stifle, Ann.
https://www.numbersusa.com/blog/daca-amnesty-rescinded
PUBLISHED: Tue, SEP 5th 2017 @ 3:33 pm EDT by Roy Beck
I’m already seeing a lot of confusion and some misleading reports on what Pres. Trump did today.
The following is based on what the Administration has issued publicly and on a briefing we received this morning from the White House.
There is NOT a 6-month delay on ending the DACA amnesty.
I was extremely concerned when I first heard over the weekend that Pres. Trump was going to end the executive DACA amnesty but only after giving Congress six months to enact a legislative amnesty.
That would have provided six months for immigration expansionists inside the Administration to delay the end of DACA even further once the deadline approached.
The reality is not perfect but is far better than advertised.
DACA ends today for anybody wanting to apply for the first time for a work permit or any other benefit.
DACA ends Oct. 5 for anybody wanting to apply for a renewal of a work permit.
Perhaps the most important thing is that no applications of any kind will be accepted after Oct. 5. For the Administration to be pressured to reverse its decision would require ramping up a whole new bureaucracy that will be closed down soon after Oct. 5.
Roy Beck
Ann apparently has a bad memory...
Pre-war quotes from "lying" House and Senate democrats...
"In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad.
In the 4 years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001."
"It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
Congressional Record - Sen. Hillary Clinton
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10288&position=all
John Kerry: "I agree completely with this Administration's goal of a regime change in Iraq - Saddam Hussein is a renegade and outlaw who turned his back on the tough conditions of his surrender put in place by the United Nations in 1991." (July 2002)
John Kerry: "I believe the record of Saddam Hussein's ruthless, reckless breach of international values and standards of behavior is cause enough for the world community to hold him accountable by use of force if necessary."
"When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable." -
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002
Congressional Record - Sen. John F. Kerry
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10174&position=all
John Kerry on the floor of the Senate
October 2002:
"With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question:
Why?
Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up?
Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community?
Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster?
Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke?
Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits?
Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously?
Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified?
Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002
Congressional Record - Sen. John F. Kerry
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10171&position=all
John Kerry: "I would disagree with John McCain that it's the actual weapons of mass destruction he may use against us, it's what he may do in another invasion of Kuwait or in a miscalculation about the Kurds or a miscalculation about Iran or particularly Israel. Those are the things that--that I think present the greatest danger. He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It's the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat." (October 2002)
John Kerry: "If You Don't Believe ... Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn't vote for me." (January 2003)
John Kerry: Saddam Hussein is a brutal dictator who must be disarmed. (March 2003)
"The Joint Chiefs should provide Congress with casualty estimates for a war in Iraq as they have done in advance of every past conflict. These estimates should consider Saddam's possible use of chemical or biological weapons against our troops.
Unlike the gulf war, many experts believe Saddam would resort to chemical and biological weapons against our troops in a desperate -attempt to save his regime if he believes he and his regime are ultimately threatened."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Oct. 8, 2002
Congressional Record - Sen. Ted Kennedy
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?position=all&page=S10090&dbname=2002_record
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
U.S. Senate - Ted Kennedy
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Transcript of Gore's speech, printed in USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-23-gore-text_x.htm
"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more.
We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."..."Iraq has continued to seek nuclear weapons and develop its arsenal in defiance of the collective will of the international community, as expressed through the United Nations Security Council. It is violating the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the Gulf war and as many as 16 Security Council resolutions, including 11 resolutions concerning Iraq's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction." -
Sen. John Edwards, October 10, 2002
Congressional Record - Sen. John Edwards
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S10325&position=all
"There is no doubt that since that time Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
http://usinfo.org/wf-archive/2001/011207/epf510.htm
"We should be hell bent on getting those weapons of mass destruction, hell bent on having a credible approach to them, but we should try to do it in a way which keeps the world together and that achieves our goal which is removing the... defanging Saddam.." -
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Dec. 9, 2002
Online with Jim Lehrer - Public Broadcasting Service
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec02/iraq_12-10.html
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
Transcript of Gore's speech, printed in USA Today
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002-09-23-gore-text_x.htm
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
U.S. Senate - Ted Kennedy
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
Congressional Record - Robert Byrd
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getpage.cgi?dbname=2002_record&page=S9874&position=all
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."-
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
Congressional Record -Sen. Jay Rockefeller
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" -
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
Congressional Record - Rep. Henry Waxman
MY SOURCE FOR ALL OF THESE QUOTES:
http://web.archive.org/web/20050405093734/http://www.americandaily.com/article/4694
I’m not a big Ann Coulter fan but you seem to miss her point.
PING
Analogous to Europe importing muslims.
A constitutional record.
I wasn't addressing any point she was trying to make here. Only what she said about democrats opposing the Iraq War, when in fact they were every bit in favor of going to war to remove that brutal murderous dictator and serious violator of numerous UN resolutions. He continually stuck his finger in our eye.
She wrote: "Liberals like to claim that their brave opposition to the Iraq War led to the midterm slaughter, but, as I recall, they were against that war in the 2004 presidential election, too"
Hey libtard, read the article before regurgitating more bureaucratic bullshit from the elites in DC onto FR. NOBODY in the immigration bureaucracy is going to enforce any kinds of conditions on illegal aliens. Since 1986--for over 30 years--all "conditions" associated with any amnesties have been wiped out by judges and NGO's and big businesses and the Ivankas and Jareds of the American cultural elite who are sympathetic to the overrunning of America by importing the scum of the earth from South American countries. Go back to DU where the hell you belong.
Well, to quote John Kerry, he was “for it until he was against it.”
The democrats are political windsocks.
There are ways that haven't been tried yet. Congress won't like them if they are tried. Maybe a symbolic scaffold set up on Capitol grounds would send them a message - probably not. There are no messages within the system that can be sent to those who have sold the country out for personal profit.
The “Great White People Replacement Project” continues unabated - and successfully.
Whites will be a minority in the not-too-distant future.
Enjoy!
P.S.
Ann, “what else can we do?” You know the answer to that and it ain’t gonna happen. The American Republic dies with whimper.
If Obama had wanted to help the “Dreamers” legally, he could have granted them PARDONS. That was the legal way to do it.
By creating illegal DACA and DAPA Obama signaled that he was more interested to community organizing than in solutions.
Simple, party doesn't matter to the swamp creatures. Too many Dem voters? Simple. pull an Arlen "the magic bullet" Specter or Lincoln Chafee.
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.