calfoxwc Posted February 23, 2016 Report Share Posted February 23, 2016 USA –-(Ammoland.com)- Wall of Fame vs Shame. How has Bernie voted in terms of border security legislation? In 2005, Bernie voted against the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Act, which would have allowed the Secretary of Homeland Security to “take all appropriate actions” to maintain control over the U.S borders. In 2006 he voted against the Secure Fence Act, which aimed to build a fence along the Mexican border.Later that year, Bernie voted against the Immigration Law Enforcement Act, which would have given local police departments free reign “to investigate, identify, arrest, detail, or transfer to federal custody” any undocumented immigrants. ~ Source feelthebern.org/ Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2016/02/wall-of-fame-vs-shame/#ixzz410So7L61 Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 23, 2016 Report Share Posted February 23, 2016 I liked Rubio until he became part of the gang of 8 with Chuck Schumer and tried to get amnesty passed. No matter how much Rubio denies it or tries to spin this it does not change the facts. The spin he is putting on it now is that he knew it was bad legislation but he was expecting the House to fix it up. Yeah right. John Boehner was fully ready to sign on to it too until he got too much pressure. So why did Rubio sign on to amnesty? No doubt he is bought and paid for by the chamber of commerce wing of the republican party who want all the cheap labor they can get coming across the border. The democrats want open borders because they see a lot of new voters. This is why nothing has been done except talk for decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 23, 2016 Report Share Posted February 23, 2016 None of them will do anything about the border and will likely try to do something to secure Mexican votes down the road. Cheap labor is paid by big companies who line the pockets of politicians. The first party to give illegals amnesty will secure that vote forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 23, 2016 Report Share Posted February 23, 2016 None of them will do anything about the border and will likely try to do something to secure Mexican votes down the road. Cheap labor is paid by big companies who line the pockets of politicians. The first party to give illegals amnesty will secure that vote forever. I haven't been a Trump supporter but honestly he might be the only one who will actually secure that border. He is the only candidate who appears not be sold out to special interest groups and if he would get elected he would have to follow through on border security. Bush Sr. got hammered bad for his "read my lips no new taxes" pledge and than raising taxes. If Trump got elected and did not follow through with border security and building the wall he would have some huge problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 23, 2016 Report Share Posted February 23, 2016 I haven't been a Trump supporter but honestly he might be the only one who will actually secure that border. He is the only candidate who appears not be sold out to special interest groups and if he would get elected he would have to follow through on border security. Bush Sr. got hammered bad for his "read my lips no new taxes" pledge and than raising taxes. If Trump got elected and did not follow through with border security and building the wall he would have some huge problems. It's his biggest campaign promise so if he didn't get the ball rolling in the first four years I couldn't see him getting a second term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 23, 2016 Report Share Posted February 23, 2016 It's the one issue he's right on. I'm not saying his wall idea is good, it sounds like a pipe dream just waiting to get dynamited. But his stance on getting a handle on people immigrating here is valid and correct. If he didn't do it from a massively racist and bigoted position he might get more traction on it. Reading about his antics surrounding the central park 5 and his refusal to acknowledge he was wrong and almost double down on it by being outraged that 5 wrongfully imprisoned men should be compensated, I mean he's just not leadership material unfortunately. If Bloomberg gets in the race and has more or less Trumps platform maybe slightly to the center a lil more, him being a more calm and rational individual would be big trouble for the dems and reps in the general election. If he pairs witih someone like Rand I can see him being the next POTUS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 I liked Rubio until he became part of the gang of 8 with Chuck Schumer and tried to get amnesty passed. No matter how much Rubio denies it or tries to spin this it does not change the facts. The spin he is putting on it now is that he knew it was bad legislation but he was expecting the House to fix it up. Yeah right. John Boehner was fully ready to sign on to it too until he got too much pressure. So why did Rubio sign on to amnesty? No doubt he is bought and paid for by the chamber of commerce wing of the republican party who want all the cheap labor they can get coming across the border. The democrats want open borders because they see a lot of new voters. This is why nothing has been done except talk for decades. None of them will do anything about the border and will likely try to do something to secure Mexican votes down the road. Cheap labor is paid by big companies who line the pockets of politicians. The first party to give illegals amnesty will secure that vote forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 So you are agreeing with Reagan or not? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 What Trump is talking about in deporting at least 11 million illegals is not feasible. If Trump would set up deportation squads around the country (as he says he will as president) I can guarantee there would be protests around this country the likes we have not seen. I fully support Trump in building the wall and securing our border first. I have heard many legal Hispanic immigrants who don't even oppose this. I don't want to see amnesty however. All those who came here illegally are like people who have not waited their turn in line and have jumped to the head of the line. Should that be rewarded? My thoughts are if they have been good citizens (without deporting them) let them apply for citizenship and then go back to the end of the line and wait. Deportation squads would be fine to round up all the illegal immigrant criminals and deport them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 What Trump is talking about in deporting at least 11 million illegals is not feasible. If Trump would set up deportation squads around the country (as he says he will as president) I can guarantee there would be protests around this country the likes we have not seen. I fully support Trump in building the wall and securing our border first. I have heard many legal Hispanic immigrants who don't even oppose this. I don't want to see amnesty however. All those who came here illegally are like people who have not waited their turn in line and have jumped to the head of the line. Should that be rewarded? My thoughts are if they have been good citizens (without deporting them) let them apply for citizenship and then go back to the end of the line and wait. Deportation squads would be fine to round up all the illegal immigrant criminals and deport them. Cruz said "I will deport them too, because it's the law" Though Cruz piggy backs on everything Trump says because it's politically expedient - though he isn't as good at it as Clinton yet. In time, maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 Cruz said "I will deport them too, because it's the law" Though Cruz piggy backs on everything Trump says because it's politically expedient - though he isn't as good at it as Clinton yet. In time, maybe. Cruz says he does not want to set up a deportation force that will go door to door to round people up. The deportation force is the novel idea of Donald Trump which I am not seeing anyone else endorsing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 Cruz says he does not want to set up a deportation force that will go door to door to round people up. The deportation force is the novel idea of Donald Trump which I am not seeing anyone else endorsing. No we already have a deportation force, it's called ICE (immigration and customs enforcement) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 No we already have a deportation force, it's called ICE (immigration and customs enforcement) So why does Trump say he will *create* a deportation force since we already have ICE? That makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 So why does Trump say he will *create* a deportation force since we already have ICE? That makes no sense. Because uneducated people will get riled up by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 So why does Trump say he will *create* a deportation force since we already have ICE? That makes no sense. Because it gets him several hours of attention on every major news network and in every newspaper. That's how Trump works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 This isn't news, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 Because it gets him several hours of attention on every major news network and in every newspaper. That's how Trump works. Trump has been a master at manipulating the media for sure. As other candidates spend millions for ads on television Trump makes full use of his celebrity status and gets millions of dollars worth of free air time. Trump is entertaining to listen to and draws viewers so Fox, CNN and MSNBC are more than happy to have him on the air as much as possible as it is brings them ratings and more viewership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 So why does Trump say he will *create* a deportation force since we already have ICE? That makes no sense. Because it seems like a lot of conservatives hear "deportation force" and it makes them perk up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 Because it seems like a lot of conservatives hear "deportation force" and it makes them perk up. Probably because the one in place is pretty much useless. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 Probably because the one in place is pretty much useless. WSS In fairness to ICE it is the Obama administration that constantly prevents them from doing their job. Obama to ICE: There “will be consequences” for doing your jobhttp://hotair.com/archives/2015/02/26/obama-to-ice-there-will-be-consequences-for-doing-your-job/ Immigration agents sue to stop Obama’s non-deportation policy http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/23/immigration-agents-sue-stop-obamas-non-deportation/?page=all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbluhm86 Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 Probably because the one in place is pretty much useless. WSS In fairness to ICE it is the Obama administration that constantly prevents them from doing their job. http://sfist.com/2016/02/20/ice_agent_leaves_gun_on_top_of_car.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 http://sfist.com/2016/02/20/ice_agent_leaves_gun_on_top_of_car.php Nice deflection but the facts are that ICE officials hands are being tied from doing their jobs by the Obama administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 So why does Trump say he will *create* a deportation force since we already have ICE? That makes no sense. because when a republican is president its ok to create a new govt agency or enact new laws. But when a democrat is president anything they try to do is "already in the books and it's just another liberal wanting to create more govt bureaucracy". The constant, and I do mean ceaseless-neverending-limitless constant, hypocrisy on the right is mesmerizing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 because when a republican is president its ok to create a new govt agency or enact new laws. But when a democrat is president anything they try to do is "already in the books and it's just another liberal wanting to create more govt bureaucracy". The constant, and I do mean ceaseless-neverending-limitless constant, hypocrisy on the right is mesmerizing. When the something new is like Obamacare and represents about 1/6th of the economy the size of the centralized control of government of the new agency might have something to do with it? Sometimes it is more than just the number of agencies created but the size and scope of the agencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 there's far more examples then just obamacare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 there's far more examples then just obamacare. This puts me in mind of the debate about Obama's executive orders. Obama has had less executive orders than other presidents but that is not the point. It's not about the numbers it is the types of executive orders which clearly are unconstitutional. Anyway your point is taken that for a party that wants less government they have created many new government agencies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted February 24, 2016 Report Share Posted February 24, 2016 although they incessantly claim to be different than the dems, they're not. They just want what they want in full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.