Paul Ryan: I’ll debate anyone who says earned legalization under the Gang of Eight bill is “amnesty”

posted at 7:21 pm on June 13, 2013 by Allahpundit

I’m assuming he would say that earned citizenship, which is slightly different, also doesn’t qualify as amnesty. In that case, I’ve got the perfect debate opponent for him. Meet Marco Rubio, candidate for Senate. October 24, 2010:

CRIST: I think what’s important is that we have a common sense approach to this problem, like every other in Washington, D.C., that they’re unable to fix. And what I think we need to do is what former President Bush supported, Senator John McCain, Senator Mel Martinez, Senator Kyl from Arizona, and others. And that is, first, secure the border. That’s the right thing to do. We have to do that to enforce the law.

After that I think you have to have an earned path to citizenship, not amnesty, as the speaker has unfairly characterized, in my view. I’m not for amnesty. People should have to get in the back of the line, pay a fine if necessary, their back taxes, and be able to become productive members of the American economy. It’s a compassionate way…

RUBIO: First of all, earned path to citizenship is basically code for amnesty. It’s what they call it. And the reality of it is this. This has to do with the bottom line that America cannot be the only country in the world that does not enforce its immigration laws.

It is unfair to the people that have legally entered this country to create an alternative pathway for individuals who entered illegally and knowingly did so.

That was back when Rubio, like Kelly Ayotte, was trying to ride a big red tea-party wave to victory in the 2010 midterms. Now that he’s safely elected, he’s comfortable arguing that the status quo is “de facto amnesty,” which apparently entitles him to rubber-stamp gigantic concessions to Democrats prioritizing legalization over border security while trying to distract conservatives with cheap social-issue panders. Question for Rubio: How soon after he made the statement quoted above did he come to realize that we have “de facto amnesty” now, which in turn requires a terrible comprehensive reform bill to solve it? The day after election day?

By Ryan’s definition of “amnesty,” presumably any penalty imposed on illegals, however small, would move this process into the realm of “earned legalization.” Candidate Rubio understood that that’s a sham; Senator Rubio has more trouble with the concept. A useful alternative definition of “amnesty,” I’d say, is rewarding people who broke U.S. law by making them eligible for citizenship despite their lawbreaking. True “earned legalization” is applying for citizenship through the proper legal channels, right? At the very least, to avoid charges of “amnesty,” you should insist on measurable control of the border before setting the millions who are here on the legalization path. Chuck Grassley tried to do that and was voted down, with all four Republicans in the Gang of Eight voting against him. That’s how our “tea-party” heroes are vindicating conservative concerns in Congress.

Here’s the clip, via the Right Pundit. And in case you missed it last night, here’s Mark Levin on Ryan.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

What the heck is going on?

We have Sarah Palin silent on this issue (she supports path to citizenship), but she had enough to post silly tweets to Bill Maher.

We have Hannity and Ed Morrissey apparently not wanting to strongly confront Rubio on his political backstabbing and on what mass scale illegal alien amnesty would do for this country.

We have even Rush and Levin treating Rubio with kid gloves.

This is really pissing me off.

We need to rise up and put a stop to this crap.

bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 9:02 AM

@bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 9:02 AM

Good post.

shar61 on June 14, 2013 at 9:05 AM

Death of a nation.

Oil Can on June 14, 2013 at 9:24 AM

Paul Ryan = RINO J@ck@$$ of the day

We have decided that “anybody but the incumbent” will be our future voting choice.
If you truly want change, throw them all out.
III

dirtengineer on June 14, 2013 at 9:32 AM

I mean, what would you suggest, a fleet of airliners? Trains? Buses? Detention camps?

JetBoy on June 13, 2013 at 7:46 PM

All of the above.

Pale Rider on June 14, 2013 at 9:34 AM

I mean shoot to kill if someone tries to cross the border and doesn’t stop…like just about every other nation does.

sharrukin on June 13, 2013 at 9:33 PM

No I’m not for that. That’s crazy.

terryannonline on June 13, 2013 at 9:37 PM

I’m all for it. Maybe when illegals start getting shot on sight, they may think twice about attempting it. Illegal immigrant is a particular sore spot for me because I married a German citizen when I was serving there as an Army soldier. I had to jump through alot of hoops to get her into the country. Then she worked hard and got her citizenship. It’s a slap in the face to her, and anyone else who came here legally and played by the rules. In fact, it was an absolute disgrace to have known illegal immigrants present in our State Capitol at the State of the Union Address. An absolute disgrace.

Pale Rider on June 14, 2013 at 9:42 AM

These people cannot be that stupid.
(Or, Could they?)

There’s got to be a money trail somewhere.

TimBuk3 on June 14, 2013 at 9:43 AM

I’m all for it. Maybe when illegals start getting shot on sight, they may think twice about attempting it. Illegal immigrant is a particular sore spot for me because I married a German citizen when I was serving there as an Army soldier. I had to jump through alot of hoops to get her into the country. Then she worked hard and got her citizenship. It’s a slap in the face to her, and anyone else who came here legally and played by the rules. In fact, it was an absolute disgrace to have known illegal immigrants present in our State Capitol at the State of the Union Address. An absolute disgrace.

Pale Rider on June 14, 2013 at 9:42 AM

This, This, THIS!! ++++

ToddPA on June 14, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Coulter kicked Hannity’s as* on immigration last night. Hannity is such a Rubio butboy it’s embarrassing.

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Ryan should debate until he’s blue in the face. Literally.

Bmore on June 14, 2013 at 9:59 AM

Unbelievable. Ryan’s “I’ll debate anyone” boils down to “I just disagree with that”.

Legalization = Amnesty. That’s just the bottom line. If they jumped our borders or overstayed their visas and are allowed to legally stay, that’s amnesty. What he’s saying essentially is that if you rob a bank, you’d be allowed to keep the money so long as you paid a minimal fine.

So disappointed in Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio and so many other Republicans who have LIED to our faces on this issue.

Murf76 on June 14, 2013 at 10:00 AM

Well, it was clear there was a problem when Ryan was recently touring around with the radical, extremist, racist, Lefty Luis Gutierrez.

visions on June 14, 2013 at 10:11 AM

So disappointed in Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio and so many other Republicans who have LIED to our faces on this issue.
Murf76 on June 14, 2013 at 10:00 AM

the word is F—–S! That’s what they are.

GhoulAid on June 14, 2013 at 10:12 AM

bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 9:02 AM

For real. I am shocked at how the GOP has swallowed this lie about illegal immigrants being predisposed to conservatism and this is going to help us get votes and blah blah blah. They’ve gone whole hog on something that is so obviously wrong. Even people I have had a great deal of respect for. The number of elected officials I respect has dwindled such that I could probably count them on my fingers.

Off hand I’ve got Trey Gowdey, Tim Scott, Louie Gohmert, & Ted Cruz. Most of the rest need to be primaried, defeated, and sent packing.

dczombie on June 14, 2013 at 10:17 AM

We need to rise up and put a stop to this crap.

bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 9:02 AM

i told you a million times that romney and ryan were open borders candidates, yet you continued your senseless worship.

you’ve lost all sense of shame.

renalin on June 14, 2013 at 10:25 AM

We have Hannity and Ed Morrissey apparently not wanting to strongly confront Rubio on his political backstabbing and on what mass scale illegal alien amnesty would do for this country.

We have even Rush and Levin treating Rubio with kid gloves.

This is really pissing me off.

We need to rise up and put a stop to this crap.

bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 9:02 AM

For once we agree. Hannity is a establishment hack. Ed is pro-amnesty and he’s an establishment squish. Sorry Ed, but it’s true. But, you’re our squish.

And, although I am a Palin fan, I am very disappointed in her for not speaking out on the one issue that can damage our country more than any other. Perhaps FNC re-hired Palin to ensure that she wouldn’t speak out on amnesty.

bw222 on June 14, 2013 at 10:25 AM

i told you a million times that romney and ryan were open borders candidates, yet you continued your senseless worship.

renalin on June 14, 2013 at 10:25 AM

I opposed Romney until he won the nomination because four more years of Obama would be so bad. In retrospect, Romney may have been the most conservative one on the ticket. Ryan has turned out to be nothing more than a liar and a fraud.

bw222 on June 14, 2013 at 10:28 AM

Times change and we ned to move with the times. Gay marriage and immigration are now bad issues for the GOP which Democrats exploit. We’re painted as the party of old white people. We’re losing the youth vote by by a shocking amount. Young people are becoming more libertarian.

This should be good for us as we are the party of small government but we will throw away this advantage if we lose the “compassion” issues which are all Democrats have left. What if we “win” on immigration but lose everything with dire consequences for our economy and country?

Reagan was pro immigration. So should we be. We can’t kick out 10 million people. We will never fully secure the border. We should embrace immigrants who want to come here and expose Democrats’ hypocrisy on immigration by shoving a big guest worker program down their throats.

breffnian on June 14, 2013 at 10:29 AM

Earned legalization; By being in the US for many years illegally, you have earned the right to be legalized.

This will prevent further illegal immigration?

Dasher on June 14, 2013 at 10:34 AM

One very, very simple question for the Gang of Eight:

You tell us that your plan is not amnesty. Very well – I believe you believe that by your definition of the word, this is not amnesty. Therefore, my question is this: How, exactly – specifically and comprehensively – do you define “Amnesty”?

psrch on June 14, 2013 at 10:41 AM

Make eVerify required for ALL employment and deny social services to those without a legitimate social security card. Aggressively fine and prosecute employers who hire illegals. Why is this so hard to do.

Kanyin on June 14, 2013 at 10:44 AM

Reagan was pro immigration. So should we be.

breffnian on June 14, 2013 at 10:29 AM

Who, exactly, isn’t pro immigration? Everyone is pro immigration, champ.

You left out an important word there. Can you guess what it was?

beatcanvas on June 14, 2013 at 10:47 AM

OT: Looks like Obama hacked into a reporter’s computer.

CBS News confirms multiple breaches of Sharyl Attkisson’s computer

“A cyber security firm hired by CBS News has determined through forensic analysis that Sharyl Attkisson’s computer was accessed by an unauthorized, external, unknown party on multiple occasions late in 2012. Evidence suggests this party performed all access remotely using Attkisson’s accounts. While no malicious code was found, forensic analysis revealed an intruder had executed commands that appeared to involve search and exfiltration of data.

sentinelrules on June 14, 2013 at 10:49 AM

Reagan was pro immigration. So should we be.

breffnian on June 14, 2013 at 10:29 AM

Most conservatives are pro-immigration. We allow 1,000,000 legal immigrants to the U.S. per year, the most in all of human history. Are you not aware of this?

The issue being discussed here is illegal immigration. Surely you must understand there is a difference?

Do you not understand that no country can survive defacto open borders and a massive, unfundable, welfare state?

Every other industrialized country, except ours, has secured their borders.

visions on June 14, 2013 at 10:52 AM

Only RINO’s can say someone here ILLEGALLY stays and that is not called amnesty.

I don’t TRUST anything these RINO’s say.

Danielvito on June 14, 2013 at 10:56 AM

Why is our side even considering an immigration bill at this point?

Shouldn’t they be standing on the Capitol steps protesting the IRS scandal? The NSA scandal? The Benghazi scandal? …

The Party of Stupid.

faraway on June 14, 2013 at 10:57 AM

i told you a million times that romney and ryan were open borders candidates, yet you continued your senseless worship.
you’ve lost all sense of shame.
renalin on June 14, 2013 at 10:25 AM

Romney was strong on this issue and remained so even through the entire general election campaign. He was even to the right of Palin on this issue, who has signaled a willingness to support this kind of amnesty compromise.

Paul Ryan and Palin are on the same page here. It’s disappointing.

Your idiotic talk about Romney being “open borders” discredits you even further.

bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 10:59 AM

Earned legalization; By being in the US for many years illegally, you have earned the right to be legalized.

This will prevent further illegal immigration?

Dasher on June 14, 2013 at 10:34 AM

It’s not “many” years. It’s one year. (Actually 1-1/2, to be completely accurate).

To qualify for amnesty under Rubio’s bill, all an illegal has to do is show they’ve been in the U.S. since December 31, 2011.

Because if an illegal has lived here for all of 2012 and half of 2013, they’ve obviously put down deep roots in their U.S. community, right? And it wouldn’t be fair — in fact it would be downright inhumane — to expect a foreigner who has been living in the U.S. for a whole year and a half to return home to a country they barely even know (not having lived there for a whole year and a half).

AZCoyote on June 14, 2013 at 10:59 AM

What he’s saying essentially is that if you rob a bank, you’d be allowed to keep the money so long as you paid a minimal fine.

So disappointed in Paul Ryan, Marco Rubio and so many other Republicans who have LIED to our faces on this issue.

Murf76 on June 14, 2013 at 10:00 AM

In your mind jay-walking and bank robbing is the same.

The fact is, many of these “illegals” are better citizens than those of Detroit or Chicago, that’s the irony.

Some of them did break the law, leaving abject poverty for a better life for their family, I imagine many of us would do the same.

And coming here, many, the vast majority, have led a decent, productive life, more productive than many “citizens”, and have contributed more to our economy than many of these citizens.

Now what do we do with 20 million? Ship them back? Good luck on the logistics of that, with many of the children being legitimate, legal citizens, born in the U.S. Whether you like it or not, that’s the law.

So our nation has thrived on the huddled masses that we have called to come to our shores…the Irish, Italians (WOPs, with-out-papers), Cuban’s, and now the other Hispanics.

They are here, the best way to deal with it is to secure the border, and begin the process of assimilating them, like Reagan wanted to do, tried to do until stymied by the crooked liberals.

Reagan was right, and most people who want a pathway are right…but it has to have teeth and the pathway isn’t a pathway to liberal/democrat policies, but a pathway to citizenship of the U.S.

We ship out the undesirable, and keep the productive, just like we have for the past several hundred years…

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Reagan was pro immigration. So should we be.

breffnian on June 14, 2013 at 10:29 AM

We are. Pro legal immigration. Why is this so hard to understand?

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Your idiotic talk about Romney being “open borders” discredits you even further.

bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 10:59 AM

Romney was whatever he needed to be to garner votes…pro-abortion, anti-abortion…pro gun, anti gun, pro taxes, anti taxes. Pro health care, anti heath care.

You can find him on either side of all major issues…pro bail out, anti bail out…he had no definitive stand except “how many votes can I get out of this crowd”…

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:06 AM

We are. Pro legal immigration. Why is this so hard to understand?

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 11:02 AM

So you agree with Reagan, the existing residents should have a pathway to permanent residency, and eventual citizenship…whether they came here legal or illegally.

The fact is, many came here “illegally”, because to escape what they were faced with, that was the only way…not unlike what many posting here would do.

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:09 AM

So you agree with Reagan, the existing residents should have a pathway to permanent residency, and eventual citizenship…whether they came here legal or illegally.

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:09 AM

Reagan admitted signing the amnesty bill was the biggest mistake of his Presidency. Actually it was selecting George H.W. Bush as his running mate.

bw222 on June 14, 2013 at 11:14 AM

The fact is, many came here “illegally”, because to escape what they were faced with, that was the only way…not unlike what many posting here would do.

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:09 AM

They didn’t come here as refugees.

sentinelrules on June 14, 2013 at 11:14 AM

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Horsesh**.

That is exactly the argument we got twenty seven years ago. Why don’t you just tell us the horse is out of the barn, the milk is already spilt, and it’s just too late now … besides, they’re really, really good people.

I’m sorry, but I care more about the really good people who are already citizens, whose wages are going to be slashed by a sudden addition of unskilled, desperate and suddenly legal labor. I care more about my own wallet that will be raped to subsidize this labor and these non-paying Obamacare recipients. Refuse them food stamps, refuse them even emergency medical care, refuse them drivers licenses, refuse them birthright citizenship, even refuse them full constitutional rights in our courts- with the only penalty for any crime deportation.

Seize the assets of those that employ them.

They will leave will self-deport.

There is no reason to do anything but secure our border and then actually quantify the problem we are dealing with.

M240H on June 14, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Every one of those morons we elected has gone insane. Defending the Republic is no longer their priority. They are legends in their own minds……….. at best.

ultracon on June 14, 2013 at 11:16 AM

Has anyone noticed an odd correlation between the increasing mass and malignancy of Obama’s scandals and the degree to which the GOP suddenly feels freer to lie to us and to betray conservatism ever more audaciously?

A weird phenomenon. It’s like some of demented psychic convergence of duplicity going on in Washington, and a psychic break — a collective reaction to the panic the elite must be experiencing and which has let loose the inner beast in all of them. It’s good, in a way. Fear gets to the truth, hastens the collapse.

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Reagan was pro immigration. So should we be. We can’t kick out 10 million people. We will never fully secure the border. We should embrace immigrants who want to come here and expose Democrats’ hypocrisy on immigration by shoving a big guest worker program down their throats.

breffnian on June 14, 2013 at 10:29 AM

First, Reagan admitted amnesty was the biggest mistake of his Presidency.

Secondly, if we permit every uneducated, unskilled third worlder who wants to come here, in 20 years the U.S. will be no different than the hell hole they left. Today’s illegals come here looking for “free stuff.”

bw222 on June 14, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Well, this is shocking…not;


Gallup: Americans’ confidence in Congress at lowest level ever

Nine in 10 Americans say they have no confidence in Congress,

ranking it last on a list of 16 institutions for the fourth straight year, Gallup said Thursday.

The 10 percent confidence level is the lowest level registered for any institution since Gallup began this poll in 1973, Gallup said.

Marcus Traianus on June 14, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Has anyone noticed an odd correlation between the increasing mass and malignancy of Obama’s scandals and the degree to which the GOP suddenly feels freer to lie to us and to betray conservatism ever more audaciously?

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Very true. Also, have you considered that the Tea Party and conservatives in general did the work in 2010 that put the Three Stooges (Boehner, Cantor and McCarthy) in positions of power.

bw222 on June 14, 2013 at 11:21 AM

And we have to get these millions of illegal aliens “out of the shadows” and do “background checks” on them so we can know who they are. Right, Ryan and Rubio?

DHS can’t even perform “background checks” on the hundreds of thousands of DREAM Act-by-executive-order amnesty applicants.

http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/06/12/overwhelming-amnesty-applications-force-dhs-to-cut-background-checks-76436

DHS is overwhelmed by hundreds of thousands of DREAMer amnesty applications. But it will have no problems with tens of millions of Rubio/gang of 8 amnesty applications.

DHS has already rubber-stamped over 99.5% of DREAMer amnesty applications. They’re doing NO criminal background checks on the applicants, and they’re NOT even requiring applicants to submit photo IDs! They’re just taking the applicants’ word for everything. Because illegal alien criminals and gang-bangers would never lie to us, right?

AZCoyote on June 14, 2013 at 11:26 AM

We ship out the undesirable, and keep the productive, just like we have for the past several hundred years…

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Unlike 200 years ago, we are no longer a developing country. Wise countries, like Canada, admit immigrants based on their education, skill sets and potential contribution to the country. Most of the illegals are uneducated, unskilled and likely lifetime welfare recipients.

bw222 on June 14, 2013 at 11:31 AM

This is a semantics debate.
‘Amnesty’ is a word they got thrown into talking points and ramped up after some Frank Luntz focus group study.
Rubio, Ryan etc. would be better off just dismissing and ignoring the word and concept rather than wasting their breath debating it.
For many, anything sort of arrest and deportation is ‘amnesty’ – and now nobody is proposing arrest and deportation anymore,
so can we just move on from this dead argument?

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:33 AM

The fact is, many came here “illegally”, because to escape what they were faced with, that was the only way…not unlike what many posting here would do.

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:09 AM

right…try telling your lefty friends that Mexico is a failed state and we have 11M economic refugees…and then 33M due to chain migration

almost everyone supports immigration..this country is not like France, Germany, or Mexico.

but a big problem is trust. There have been comphrensive immigation bills in 06, 07, 10, 13…so this is a BIG deal to the political class (ie they get a lot of Power/Money out of it0

and, also, the political class is perfectly happy with NSA, IRS, and Sharyl Attkinssons computer being hacked.

so you can make idealize arguments…but remember, we have to factor in the deep and abiding corruption and cronyism of the aristocracy

r keller on June 14, 2013 at 11:37 AM

We ship out the undesirable, and keep the productive, just like we have for the past several hundred years…

right2bright on June 14, 2013 at 11:02 AM

No. They are all criminals. They ALL gotta go. It’s time to become bastards about this. They are intruders and MOOCHERS. They cost all of us that work for a living and it has to stop.

My sympathy and my charity is for my fellow citizens. You know, those people I once wrote a check for. AND NO ONE ELSE.

And if you sense I have some FIRE over this issue, you’d be correct.

Some of the “Legal” “Guest Workers” we’ve brought into this country decided I wasn’t worthy to have a job.

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Unlike 200 years ago, we are no longer a developing country. Wise countries, like Canada, admit immigrants based on their education, skill sets and potential contribution to the country. Most of the illegals are uneducated, unskilled and likely lifetime welfare recipients.

All designed by the Left as an atonement for our Nations past exploitation of poor nations and peoples in bringing them here so that our wealth can be redistributed “fairly”, depress wages for the benefit of big business, and build a huge dependent class who will support a certain party’s goal of perpetual and unchallenged power and control.

hawkeye54 on June 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM

What sea change? The one that elected and re-elected Obama? Trust me I understand.

Obviously not, as your reliance on static scoring demonstrates.

jangle12 on June 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM

It’s time to become bastards about this.

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 11:38 AM

And you’re not wasting any time.

Understood you have some personal gripes here – but the reps have a responsibly to work on policy, with a view of what is beneficial to the country. And that is (finally) the discussion taking place.
I can’t see where this going, but to be sure it will not at all be what you propose and advocate for.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM

China’s illegal immigration enforcement:
1. Secure border and wall with N. Korea.
2. Reward citizens monetarily when turning in illegals if it leads to deportation. Incentivizing citizens to report/deport illegals.

United States immigration enforcement:
1. Don’t secure the border, don’t build a wall.
2. Reward illegal aliens monetarily for staying in the shadows.

weaselyone on June 14, 2013 at 11:47 AM

For many, anything sort of arrest and deportation is ‘amnesty’ – and now nobody is proposing arrest and deportation anymore,
so can we just move on from this dead argument?

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:33 AM

No. The law calls for arrest and deportation. Arrest and deportation it is. I will not accept the premise that our current laws are inadequate while we do not enforce them.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 11:49 AM

The fact is, many came here “illegally”, because to escape what they were faced with, that was the only way…not unlike what many posting here would do.

True, and in days of yore when such opportunities to escape were virtually nil, there was a perpetual cycle of revolution to deal with what they faced in the homeland.

Some of us might do the same for economic survival, but since that option no longer exists, if it ever did, we will either have to surrender and accept being overwhelmed and adapt to our upcoming utopia, or revolt ourselves.

hawkeye54 on June 14, 2013 at 11:49 AM

…reps have a responsibly to work on policy, with a view of what is beneficial to the country. And that is (finally) the discussion taking place.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Okay, smarty-pants. Tell me how the Gang of Eight’s work will benefit America, if you’re so sure that it even will.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 11:50 AM

For many, anything sort of arrest and deportation is ‘amnesty’ – and now nobody is proposing arrest and deportation anymore,
so can we just move on from this dead argument?

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:33 AM

No. The law calls for arrest and deportation. Arrest and deportation it is. I will not accept the premise that our current laws are inadequate while we do not enforce them.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 11:49 AM

The reason they are selectively enforced because they are indeed inadequate. And they are impractical.
Otherwise we wouldn’t be having this debate.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:53 AM

And you’re not wasting any time.

Understood you have some personal gripes here – but the reps have a responsibly to work on policy, with a view of what is beneficial to the country. And that is (finally) the discussion taking place.
I can’t see where this going, but to be sure it will not at all be what you propose and advocate for.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM

And the executive branch has a responsibility to enforce the existing laws.

Your argument is that the legislators have a resonsibility to act on policy because the executive has refused to enforce existing policy.

weaselyone on June 14, 2013 at 11:53 AM

I will not debate it. But, what makes the senate think that illegal immigration will not stop if you set the bar so high like this for people who are dirt poor already. What with the openness of the border now they will come in anyway as before. You have not changed a thing. Other than adding more to the welfare rolls. Donks.

jake49 on June 14, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Third party.

Mr. Arrogant on June 14, 2013 at 11:55 AM

I can’t see where this going, but to be sure it will not at all be what you propose and advocate for.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Probably not. But I have read the bill. It does Nada to secure the border and it does immediately give legal status to all the criminals.

I don’t mind being a bastard for my country. Not one damned bit.

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 11:55 AM

Okay, smarty-pants. Tell me how the Gang of Eight’s work will benefit America, if you’re so sure that it even will.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 11:50 AM

Help to settle what’s unsettled.
Hopefully continue to move the issue forward and away from the useless ‘culture war’ setting the right assigned to it.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:57 AM

The reason they are selectively enforced because they are indeed inadequate. And they are impractical.
Otherwise we wouldn’t be having this debate.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:53 AM

I reject that. It’s a faulty premise to begin with considering that the next laws we pass will be no more likely to be enforced and we’ll be having this conversation again in twenty years! Did 1986 really teach you nothing?

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Help to settle what’s unsettled.
Hopefully continue to move the issue forward and away from the useless ‘culture war’ setting the right assigned to it.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:57 AM

That’s it? That’s the best you got? You know what else would help us “settle what’s unsettled?” Enforcement of the law as-written. I will never understand why you and the Gang of Eight find that so controversial.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 11:58 AM

That’s it? That’s the best you got? You know what else would help us “settle what’s unsettled?” Enforcement of the law as-written. I will never understand why you and the Gang of Eight find that so controversial.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 11:58 AM

The importation of millions more socialist’s give them a serious woody, Gryphon.

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 12:00 PM

The importation of millions more socialist’s give them a serious woody, Gryphon.

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 12:00 PM

So how do you explain that Republicans seem to be getting their rocks off on this just as much? ARGH!

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 12:04 PM

That’s it? That’s the best you got? You know what else would help us “settle what’s unsettled?” Enforcement of the law as-written. I will never understand why you and the Gang of Eight find that so controversial.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 11:58 AM

And that is all you’ve got…’enforce the laws’.
Stick to that if you want, but it’s slogan for an ideology – not a solution to a problem.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 12:10 PM

The importation of millions more socialist’s give them a serious woody, Gryphon.

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 12:00 PM

Stay focused now…stay focused.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 12:11 PM

And that is all you’ve got…’enforce the laws’.
Stick to that if you want, but it’s slogan for an ideology – not a solution to a problem.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 12:10 PM

“Enforce the laws.” A slogan. An ideology. This is how far America has sunk, ladies and gentlemen. “Enforce the laws” is all I have because it’s all we need, libwit. We don’t need another law that we’re just going to turn around and refuse to enforce a la 1986.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 12:15 PM

I can’t see where this going, but to be sure it will not at all be what you propose and advocate for.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Probably not. But I have read the bill. It does Nada to secure the border and it does immediately give legal status to all the criminals.

I don’t mind being a bastard for my country. Not one damned bit.

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 11:55 AM

I don’t object to you being a bastard for your country. In many cases I’d welcome it.
But I don’t see that’s the case here.
I support better border security…but not to the point of an East Berlin wall.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 12:16 PM

Paul Ryan: I’ll debate anyone who says earned legalization under the Gang of Eight bill is “amnesty”

What time works for you?

Stoic Patriot on June 14, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Stick to that if you want, but it’s slogan for an ideology – not a solution to a problem.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 12:10 PM

An Orwellian statement of inverted morality. In fact, it is exactly the solution. The “slogans and ideologies” are bulgingly packaged with “immigration reform.”

The perdurable simplicity and truth of “enforce the laws” scares the cosmopolitans.

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM

So how do you explain that Republicans seem to be getting their rocks off on this just as much? ARGH!

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 12:04 PM

They have a dream…they will wake up one day and the Wash Post will say nice things about them.

It’s just a dream mind you but they think it will happen one day.

jangle12 on June 14, 2013 at 12:28 PM

Enforcing the laws is not some sort of abstract intellectual exercise. It’s not just another policy position. It’s constitutionally mandated that the executive branch enforce laws and faithfully execute them.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 12:30 PM

The perdurable simplicity and truth of “enforce the laws” scares the cosmopolitans.

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM

If you want Orwellian…when is the last time you didn’t break and enforceable law?

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Little Paul Ryan is sure a tough talker when he’s hosing American citizens but why did a DAzz like Biden beat him like a little girl and why did this prick not even manage to carry his own state as VP CN with the other pansy Romney. You frickin LOSER!

el Vaquero on June 14, 2013 at 12:35 PM

If you want Orwellian…when is the last time you didn’t break and enforceable law?

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 12:32 PM

And that is relevant to the question of national sovereignty…how?

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 12:36 PM

I support better border security…but not to the point of an East Berlin wall.

verbaluce on June 14, 2013 at 12:16 PM

That was for keeping people IN. Obviously we need some effective means for keeping them OUT.

It works for the Israelis:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/06/04/Israel-Builds-New-Border-Fence-Illegal-Crossings-Drop-99-9

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 12:54 PM

So how do you explain that Republicans seem to be getting their rocks off on this just as much? ARGH!

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 12:04 PM

I wish I knew. It’s depressing that they are either, bought, blackmailed or braindead.

dogsoldier on June 14, 2013 at 12:56 PM

Is bluegill on her meds today or was she on them yesterday?

Her conflicting comments are confusing.

Yesterday on Palin.

We need more articulate, intelligent conservative analysts who appeal to younger audiences. Palin’s influence starts and stops at the dolt crowd, I’m sorry to say. Who takes this woman seriously? Her online posts are great, but I doubt she writes them. Live and unscripted she is a total inarticulate bore.

Still, maybe she will be a new Palin now. Let’s hope.

bluegill on June 13, 2013 at 7:45 PM

Today on Palin.

What the heck is going on?

We have Sarah Palin silent on this issue (she supports path to citizenship), but she had enough to post silly tweets to Bill Maher.

bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 9:02 AM

So bluegill, do you want Palin to opine on issues or not?

chief on June 14, 2013 at 1:59 PM

Enforcing the laws is not some sort of abstract intellectual exercise. It’s not just another policy position. It’s constitutionally mandated that the executive branch enforce laws and faithfully execute them.

gryphon202 on June 14, 2013 at 12:30 PM

Their oaths are as dead as their offices.

I think this might be critical mass. The GOP is cutting off any avenue of escape that people had. I know that many people are not going to go vote GOP next time to try to stop the Democrats, because voting GOP doesn’t stop the Democrats. I don’t know how many “many” is, though. My point is that this might be the point to mark on the calender as the start of the permanent progressive majority everywhere but local government, not the point when illegals start voting.

Could be wrong, though. Always best to keep plodding, just in case. Yet if this isn’t unraveling, I never want to see real unraveling.

Axe on June 14, 2013 at 2:16 PM

bluegill on June 14, 2013 at 9:02 AM

So bluegill, do you want Palin to opine on issues or not?

chief on June 14, 2013 at 1:59 PM

This.

arnold ziffel on June 14, 2013 at 4:14 PM

Actually, I am happy Romney selected Ryan as his VP candidate as it exposed him for what he is:
* Establishment Republican
* Poor debater
* Poor campaigner, lacking charisma
* A man who is best at talking the talk

bw222 on June 14, 2013 at 5:04 PM

The GOP is cutting off any avenue of escape that people had. I know that many people are not going to go vote GOP next time to try to stop the Democrats, because voting GOP doesn’t stop the Democrats.
Axe on June 14, 2013 at 2:16 PM

Perfectly said. The GOP has been operating on a default strategy (not exactly a strategy in the sense of a proactive means of fulfilling a larger or higher mission) of appearing as the “least objectionable party.” They’ve been counting on disgust with Obama to drive voters to them. Essentially passive and fear-based. Which summed up Romney’s entire campaign (except when aimed at conservatives, in which the aggressive side of their passive-aggressive profile could be seen. i.e., “you better vote for us, you pea-brained lowlifes, unless you want to see the alternative in power”, etc. But the self-interested bankruptcy of the “strategy” has been exposed now.

In any case, I’m convinced the GOP as presently constituted isn’t psychologically fit to comprehend or deal with Obama. So the dissolution of the party may be a good thing.

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 5:10 PM

Coulter kicked Hannity’s as* on immigration last night. Hannity is such a Rubio butboy it’s embarrassing.

rrpjr on June 14, 2013 at 9:51 AM

Almost as embarrassing as when Coulter was Christie’s cheerleader.

So there’s that too.

workingclass artist on June 14, 2013 at 11:22 PM

It’s funny to read Palin hatin bluegill getting mad with Palin coz Palin is allegedly silent on the issue of immigration.

TheAlamos on June 15, 2013 at 4:28 AM

Ryan and Rubio are dead to me as is 99% of the GOP

Just let it burn and be done with it, clearly there is no difference now between the two parties.

Why are we discussing this? Why isn’t congress hammering people 24/7 about Bengazi? Prisim? The IRS scandel alone should be tying them up for months! Instead were fooling about with this cr@p and falling right into the dems hands?

The stupid party indeed.

gdonovan on June 15, 2013 at 7:06 AM

You want to stop the people flowing over the border?

No welfare, no SNAP, No section 8 housing for people who have not been legal for 5 years and make it a felony with mandatory 5 years in prison to hire illegals.

If no one is hiring and there is no hand outs then the number of people will stop coming.

gdonovan on June 15, 2013 at 7:13 AM

Ryan assumes he is relevant. He could not successfully debate the demented Biden, so he has no role here. Thanks for trying.

virgo on June 15, 2013 at 12:32 PM

Proves that they are ALL morons! God help us all! And God save the Republic!

ultracon on June 15, 2013 at 8:39 PM

Paul Ryan: I’ll debate anyone who says earned legalization under the Gang of Eight bill is “amnesty”

And you will lose that debate.

bgibbs1000 on June 16, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5