Children and immigration reform

[BigRedBuster]

19 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Apparently you don’t grasp the sarcasm within a post.  
 

It’s the current argument you are making now, that Republicans aren’t serious because they won’t support this one particular bill, so I make a similar argument that if a tougher bill comes across at a future date and Dems don’t support it, that means they aren’t serious.   Correct!

Where is the Republicans going to the table with any changes to the bill?  When are they going to do that? 

 

Hint, they were at the table when this bill was written and they agreed to it.  That's what bipartisan means.

[BigRedBuster]

2 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

The bill itself is putting out the points that you won’t acknowledge.  
 

I’m arguing against the bill because it’s worse than what we had prior to your party’s leader taking charge.   It’s not hard to understand this.  Literally just look at the data, and look at the lack of enforcement measures being empires but the dopes currently running things.   The dopes you support.  

I don't have a party. 

 

Republicans agreed to this bill.  Now they don't want it because of one reason.  ONE REASON.....and that's because Trump doesn't want it for political reasons.  

Congrats.  He's happy you're helping him.

[Archy1221]

15 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

Where is the Republicans going to the table with any changes to the bill?  When are they going to do that? 

 

Hint, they were at the table when this bill was written and they agreed to it.  That's what bipartisan means.

You keep repeating this Democrat talking point of  Republicans as if it meant some large number of them.   It was the OK dude and McConnell  and leaving pretty much everyone else in the dark about what they are inputting.   So hint….the VAST majority did not agree to it.  
 

Where are Democrats in the Senate going to the table to negotiate HR2 and make changes to it?  It’s already passed one part of Congress unlike the Senate bill?  

[Archy1221]

17 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

I don't have a party. 

 

Republicans agreed to this bill.  Now they don't want it because of one reason.  ONE REASON.....and that's because Trump doesn't want it for political reasons.  

Congrats.  He's happy you're helping him.

You agree with and support and vote for almost everything in the Democrat position.  So while you may not have a D in your voter registration, you do currently have a de facto party whether you want to admit it or not.   
 

But keep repeating your party line about Republicans as a party agrees to this bill.  Joe would like you to keep it up while you dismiss every single issue that is brought up about the bill.  

[commando]

if the democrats shut the border down to 0 crossings i bet trump and the republicans would object to it.  

[BigRedBuster]

Just now, Archy1221 said:

You agree with and support and vote for almost everything in the Democrat position.  So while you may not have a D in your voter registration, you do currently have a de facto party whether you want to admit it or not.   
 

I have voted for Dems because the Republican party is a s#!t show nominating people like Trump, MTG, Bobo, Gym Jordan, Ted Cruz....etc.  These people should NOT have one ounce of power in our government.  But....your party fully supports them and keeps nominating them. And, Trump is the defacto leader of the party and everyone does nothing but listen to him.

 

I have supported many things the Dems have done because the Republican party is such a s#!t show that the few things they have tried to do or have done are pathetic.  Like, trying to argue that a 12 year old rape victim of her father needs to carry out the term instead of being able to get an abortion because that's what God would want.

 

I'm literally begging for a reasonable conservative side in America.  But, right now we don't have anywhere close to that.  A conservative party does NOT support a violent attack on our government because that attack was in support of their dear leader.

 

Your Speaker of the house has said he speaks to Trump almost every day and specifically about the border situation. He's literally taking his orders from Trump....and Trump doesn't want this because it will hurt his election.  And, I don't need to listen to Dems say that.  People from your own party are saying that's the reason.

It's not getting passed because Trump doesn't want it and he's told Johnson this. He doesn't want it because it would help Biden in the election.

[Danny Bateman]

This whole thread has just devolved into reverse engineering reasons Republicans are ACTUALLY being the reasonable, responsible ones here.

 

Instead of demanding specific stuff in the bill, getting what they wanted included. And then spiking the bill anyway.

 

So now if we’d all just grow up and accept a MORE conservative bill we could pass it and move on.

 

I’m sorry, no. The Republican Party is a bunch of extremist weirdos on pretty much any given topic. And their elected officials are spineless, craven bootlickers so scared of the leader of their own party they buckle and bow to his every whim without so much as a glancing independent thought.

 

Screw them. They don’t get to take the border hostage.

[Archy1221]

4 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Your Speaker of the house has said he speaks to Trump almost every day and specifically about the border situation. He's literally taking his orders from Trump....and Trump doesn't want this because it will hurt his election.  And, I don't need to listen to Dems say that.  People from your own party are saying that's the reason.

That same Speaker is in charge of a group that has ALREADY passed a border bill almost 8 months ago!  
 

Your party won’t negotiate on it in Senate because Chuck Schumer is taking orders from the The Big Guys administration to shelve it instead of making it acceptable to them.  
 

Posting James Langford clips having a hissy fit because he negotiated a s#!t sandwich and people wouldn’t eat it isn’t the flex you believe it to be.  By that standard, Dems solely own the border chaos because Biden’s admin won’t force the current law, undid things that worked and won’t pass or negotiate on HR2.  
 

It’s Telling you won’t address or acknowledge those shortcomings or the shortcomings pointed out to you in the Senate bill and your only reason to pass it is because “it’s better than nothing”, or “it’s better than what we currently have”.  
 

LOL, that’s by design of the current dumbass in office and his minions you support that purposely made the issue this way so people like you would fall for the “well it’s better than the disaster we have, even though it’s worse than what we used to have or if we would at least enforce laws on the books”.  

[Archy1221]

5 minutes ago, Danny Bateman said:

This whole thread has just devolved into reverse engineering reasons Republicans are ACTUALLY being the reasonable, responsible ones here.

 

Instead of demanding specific stuff in the bill, getting what they wanted included. And then spiking the bill anyway.

 

So now if we’d all just grow up and accept a MORE conservative bill we could pass it and move on.

 

I’m sorry, no. The Republican Party is a bunch of extremist weirdos on pretty much any given topic. And their elected officials are spineless, craven bootlickers so scared of the leader of their own party they buckle and bow to his every whim without so much as a glancing independent thought.

 

Screw them. They don’t get to take the border hostage.

Of the issues I pointed out I have a problem with, what makes changing them some bastion of strict conservative ideology?   
 

Give me a good reason why border encounters have to average 5,000 not even including a good portion of the people coming in order to close the border to illegals coming over?   Why can’t that number be 2,000 ( a number even Obama and his HHS Secretary thought was too high). 
 

Why can only the most Liberal judicial circuit hear legal challenges?  
 

Why do the toughest provisions Sunset after three years?  Why do the toughest provisions have a limited number of days a year they can be used and decline in the subsequent years?  
 

Why does the proposed law have to get watered down over time? 
 

The proposed amnesty solution is almost as liberal as one can make it.  Nice work James!  

[BigRedBuster]

26 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

That same Speaker is in charge of a group that has ALREADY passed a border bill almost 8 months ago!  
 

Your party won’t negotiate on it in Senate because Chuck Schumer is taking orders from the The Big Guys administration to shelve it instead of making it acceptable to them.  
 

Posting James Langford clips having a hissy fit because he negotiated a s#!t sandwich and people wouldn’t eat it isn’t the flex you believe it to be.  By that standard, Dems solely own the border chaos because Biden’s admin won’t force the current law, undid things that worked and won’t pass or negotiate on HR2.  
 

It’s Telling you won’t address or acknowledge those shortcomings or the shortcomings pointed out to you in the Senate bill and your only reason to pass it is because “it’s better than nothing”, or “it’s better than what we currently have”.  
 

LOL, that’s by design of the current dumbass in office and his minions you support that purposely made the issue this way so people like you would fall for the “well it’s better than the disaster we have, even though it’s worse than what we used to have or if we would at least enforce laws on the books”.  

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

3 hours ago, commando said:

if the democrats shut the border down to 0 crossings i bet trump and the republicans would object to it.  

There's a great story from the Obama years. The story goes something like this:

 

"After working with Senate Republicans for months, offering concession after concession, Obama asked Senator Chuck Grassley, one of the lead negotiators for Republicans on the Affordable Care Act.. "If I offer you every concession, will you vote for the Bill?"

 

Senator Grassley Responded, "No, Mr. President, I don't think I can".

 

At this moment, President Obama realized that after working with them for months to forge a compromise, he realized there was no compromise to be had.

 

This an old, reliable play from the political playbook. It's up to the American voter to correctly punish the party responsible, and we all know how that will play out.

[Dr. Strangelove]

3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Aaaaannnnndddddd now you finally understand the feature of The Big Guy’s policy on the border the past three years.  We are making progress here. 

You are never going to believe this but the President doesn't have all encompassing authoritarian powers, no matter how many times you vote for it. 

 

For the last few decades, each President's border policy gets endlessly tied up in courts because "jUsT ENfoRcInG ExIStiNg LaW" is endlessly appealed because the current law is not adequate to address current problems.

 

It's almost like, and this is insane, that we need a NEW law that specifically outlines the Presidents ability to address the border. It could even be bipartisan! Republicans can even nominate somebody to negotiate for them! It's almost like, and again this is absolutely bonkers, that it's something Republicans themselves requested to be done. 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

57 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Hey man, we're losing in the polls to this. 

 

Imagine how Republicans would perform in elections if the inmates weren't running the Asylum.