Report: Boehner tells House GOP that he won’t bring Gang of Eight bill up for a vote

posted at 11:21 am on June 26, 2013 by Allahpundit

Doesn’t mean the House won’t pass something of its own, and it doesn’t mean something resembling the Gang of Eight bill won’t emerge from the conference committee later. But let’s appreciate good news while we have it.

I wonder if Boehner’s main concern here is PR or if he’s worried that the damned thing might actually pass if he allows a vote on it. In terms of PR, he doesn’t want to make it any easier for Democrats to paint the GOP as anti-reform; shelving the bill is better in that sense than putting it on the floor and letting House Republicans demolish it. On the other hand, maybe he’s not so sure that it would actually be demolished. Pelosi can probably pull together 170-80 Democratic votes for it. In that case, all you’d need are 40-50 wayward RINOs to defy leadership and cross the aisle and the bill will be on Obama’s desk. Can’t chance it.

That doesn’t mean, though, that they’re not suddenly under heavy pressure to oppose a Gang-style compromise. Per Rasmussen’s new poll, fully 51 percent of likely voters say that immigration is now “very important” to how they’ll vote in the midterms. One Senate staffer in Roger Wicker’s office told the Daily Caller that they got 500 calls yesterday alone. House Republicans will hear it even louder than that now that they’re the last line of defense from passage and grassroots favorites like Palin are calling openly for primary challenges against people who vote for the Gang’s bill:

“Conservatives are getting ready for the 2014 and 2016 primaries. We have long memories, and there will be consequences for those who break campaign promises and vote for this amnesty bill,” Palin told Breitbart News. “Competition makes everyone work harder, be better, and be held accountable. This applies to politics, too. No one is ‘entitled’ to anything.”…

Palin responded to Breitbart News’s request for comment about an interview she did earlier on Tuesday with John Gibson on Fox News radio in which she said Rubio and Ayotte “turned their back” on voters and should be primaried to be held accountable. Rubio and Ayotte will be up for reelection in 2016…

Palin also told Gibson that she had said “nice things” about Rubio before he “reneged on his promise” on the bill because she thought he was “an honest politician.” She remarked, “honest politician” is too often an oxymoron.

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons. Killing the Gang of Eight bill and offering nothing in return is, shall we say, a “bad narrative” to hand to the media. Better to pass something and then have Senate Democrats kill it in their chamber to complicate the GOP-is-a-roadblock-to-reform narrative. Maybe they’ll pass a true “security first” bill that demands border improvements before any sort of legalization occurs. Or maybe they’ll take Mickey Kaus’s oft-offered advice and pass some sort of smaller reform on which comprehensive reform can be built later if security improves in the meantime. E.g., they could pass the DREAM Act to amnestize younger illegals in exchange for Democrats approving E-Verify. If Reid doesn’t like that, then he can explain why it fell to Democrats this time to kill the DREAM.

Go look at National Journal’s new poll revealing just how much Americans hate the idea of making government benefits available to illegals under the Gang’s bill. (Even Democrats, to the tune of 65 percent.) Which benefits does the bill grant? Hard to say — remember, even the people who voted to end debate on it didn’t care to scrutinize it first for horrible unintended consequences. And speaking of benefits, Ryan Lizza asks an excellent question:

Leahy’s amendment would have extended benefits under the Senate bill to the spouses of gay illegals. That was Rubio’s dealbreaker on the bill — not the fact that it placed legalization before border security, not the fact that by CBO’s estimate it would reduce illegal immigration by just 25 percent (before Corker/Hoeven), but the fact that a tiny percentage of the illegal population would be allowed spousal benefits notwithstanding their being gay and married. That’s the smoking gun on how unserious and nakedly political all this is for him. No one who cares about border security would let that, rather than “legalization first,” jeopardize his vote for the bill, but it makes perfect sense if you realize that he’s worried about winning social conservative votes in 2016, especially in Iowa. In any case, the Court’s now, apparently, rendered Leahy’s amendment moot on constitutional grounds. Spouses of gay illegals should get benefits as a matter of equal protection. Does that mean Rubio walks? Or does he just shrug it off on grounds that he disagrees with the Court but whaddaya gonna do? I know how I’m betting.


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 2

Start with a border security only bill first.

And maybe a law that says ‘enforce the laws’.

TerryW on June 26, 2013 at 11:27 AM

I wonder if Boehner’s main concern here is PR or if he’s worried that the damned thing might actually pass if he allows a vote on it.

What that says is the reality that no one in the GOP can be trusted!

Don L on June 26, 2013 at 11:28 AM

So far so good. But that’s what the guy who fell off the observation deck of the Empire State Building said as story after story slipped past.

MaiDee on June 26, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons. Killing the Gang of Eight bill and offering nothing in return is, shall we say, a “bad narrative” to hand to the media.

Why? Stop playing defense against the Democrat/media complex. If they want to push for amnesty for illegals at a time when the economy is still in the crapper and Obamacare is about to drop on us like an atomic bomb, let them. I can’t imagine a better contrast heading into the midterms than to have the Dems talking about this, gay marriage, gun control, and climate change while the GOP addresses issues that actually matter to voters.

Doughboy on June 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Seems premature by Boehner.
It gets me worried. Kind of like Obamacare, we thought we had it beat, and so we let our guard down, and all of a sudden there was a vote and Obamacare passed. Keep vigilant against this amnesty monster.

anotherJoe on June 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM

TerryW on June 26, 2013 at 11:27 AM

And maybe a law that says you have to complete the 700 miles already authorized for construction… and another law that says enforcing existing laws isn’t an option… and another law that says enforcement isn’t at the discretion of the Secretary of Homeland Security…

Hill60 on June 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Yes, let’s have the house pass SOMETHING, ANYTHING to prevent that bad narrative. It’s not as if the media goes after republicans no matter what they do.

rjcylon on June 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM

What difference, at this point, does it make?

We’re all going to he!! in a hand basket anyway, to quote my late Grandmother.

The House will do something stupid no matter what they say. Bonehead might say that he won’t bring the Gangbang of 8′s bill up, but rest assured he will allow the House to bring their own bill up and once that’s done, conference committee it goes and hello Norte Mexico here we come.

D-fusit on June 26, 2013 at 11:30 AM

Why is Boehner getting in the way of Rubios’s future political ambitions?

Doesn’t Boehner know this makes Rubio look bad?

portlandon on June 26, 2013 at 11:31 AM

It gets me worried. Kind of like Obamacare, we thought we had it beat, and so we let our guard down, and all of a sudden there was a vote and Obamacare passed. Keep vigilant against this amnesty monster.

anotherJoe on June 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Yep. Get ready for them to sneak something past via conference.

Doomberg on June 26, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Start with a border security only bill first.

And maybe a law that says ‘enforce the laws’.

TerryW on June 26, 2013 at 11:27 AM

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Completely agree. The perfect starter to the piecemeal approach. That alone will will set a hard starting negotiating position.

Good news that Boehner is tabling the Gang of 8 bill.

phoenixrisen on June 26, 2013 at 11:31 AM

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons.

tactical reasons = ability to feed off of the public coffer for another term while accomplishing zippidy-doo-dah.

fogw on June 26, 2013 at 11:32 AM

This is what’s known as win-win in DC; Republicans get to keep the nation out of Latin America for few more decades and Democrats get to watch Rubio crash and burn. I’ll be making smores if anyone needs me. Between this and the VRA thing, Abobo is a happy camper for the first time in a long time.

:P

abobo on June 26, 2013 at 11:33 AM

How about this very simple bill:

1. Secure the border.
2. Under penalty of impeachment for neglect, the president must enforce our current immigration laws.

That’s it. Make it a one-pager.

beatcanvas on June 26, 2013 at 11:34 AM

This is NOT difficult.

Yes, we conservatives support reform but we first demand that existing law be enforced.

The problem isn’t lack of laws but a willful lack of enforcement.

If only for theater the House needs to follow the lead of Rep. Goodlatte and pass single issue bils addressing unique aspects of immigration starting with enforcement.

The consideration and passage of additional bills should be preconditioned on the follow through of previous bills.

Thus, only when enforcement is in place should a bill dealing with enforcement be introduced.

The problem the GOP has is an inability to communicate a coherent vision and strategy.

Stop letting the Democrats control the message!

Charlemagne on June 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons. Killing the Gang of Eight bill and offering nothing in return is, shall we say, a “bad narrative” to hand to the media.

I don’t quite buy that; no Republican has yet really asserted the harm any form of amnesty will do to the minority citizenry of this nation. The bold, and meda attention-getting, Republican Representative would very loudly and publicly call out the Congressional Black Caucus for a stance on this matter. Heck, the bold Republican would even find a way to frame an anti-amnesty position as protecting the minority vote in this country.

“Where’s the Delta I used to know?”

M240H on June 26, 2013 at 11:35 AM

Someone needed to tell Rubio to “pound sand”…

Thank You Speaker Boehner ! :)

BigSven on June 26, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons. Killing the Gang of Eight bill and offering nothing in return is, shall we say, a “bad narrative” to hand to the media.

Why? Stop playing defense against the Democrat/media complex. If they want to push for amnesty for illegals at a time when the economy is still in the crapper and Obamacare is about to drop on us like an atomic bomb, let them. I can’t imagine a better contrast heading into the midterms than to have the Dems talking about this, gay marriage, gun control, and climate change while the GOP addresses issues that actually matter to voters.

Doughboy on June 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM

The Senate bill was/is—by design—intended to fail in the House to purge Tea Party representatives in 2014. If the proper narrative is used, as Doughboy has pointed out, the Democrats will also fail at this attempt.

Rovin on June 26, 2013 at 11:36 AM

To hell with the dissembling quisling Marco Rubio. That’s all I have to say on the subject.

Cicero43 on June 26, 2013 at 11:37 AM

2. Under penalty of impeachment for neglect, the president must enforce our current immigration laws.

I completely agree. Why isn’t the GOP doing something about this willful disregard for the LAW?

If laws passed in 1986 were enforced we wouldn’t have this problem today. Government caused this situation.

Charlemagne on June 26, 2013 at 11:37 AM

An observation (likely has been made already, but I’m too busy to read all the comments)- those 51% of LV that hold immigration as ‘very important’ to their midterm votes include BOTH those who support this abortion of a bill, and, more importantly, those who oppose it. And, of those ginned up about it, it is likely that the majority are opposed.

I hope the primary season is quite busy for those who stupidly supported this Schumer-Durban immigration bill (i.e. the suckers like Rubio and Ayotte who are up for reelection in 2014)

DopLar on June 26, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Start with a border security only bill first.

And maybe a law that says ‘enforce the laws’.

TerryW on June 26, 2013 at 11:27 A

M

We’d be better off electing better people.

trigon on June 26, 2013 at 11:38 AM

One more thing: don’t trust Boehner.

DopLar on June 26, 2013 at 11:38 AM

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons

That is how this problem started…

we don’t want people living in shadows, do we?

mjbrooks3 on June 26, 2013 at 11:38 AM

I’m not worried at this point. I think the handwriting for Shamnesty was on the wall when the gun bill died in the Senate. Not that I didn’t tell the NRCC guy who called me this morning nada until the bill fails, but I’m optimistic.

Sekhmet on June 26, 2013 at 11:39 AM

Don’t bring up any “House Versions”. The Senate bill is a freakin’ mess. Just shelve it for “consideration at a later date”, and funnel into the Closet of Unpassable Bills to languish for eternity.

Best thing the Senate did was to vote on it without reading it. Gave Boehner cover to toss it into the fire.

Nethicus on June 26, 2013 at 11:39 AM

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons.

Not if doing nothing effectively kills amnesty (and the still slight prospect of Marco Rattio’s political future)–two scalps on one belt.

MaiDee on June 26, 2013 at 11:40 AM

Say thank you to Dingy Harry for insulting Boehner on the Farm Bill yesterday…

phreshone on June 26, 2013 at 11:40 AM

Rubio is not pleased, he vaporized his chance to ever be POTUS by supporting a bill which is now being used as a doorstop in the House coat closet.

Bishop on June 26, 2013 at 11:42 AM

Drag it out, make the Dems and RINOs defend every nuance and possible outcome.

“We’re not against ‘reform’. We just don’t like your plan for it, or any other one you might come up with.”

Liam on June 26, 2013 at 11:42 AM

That’s it. Make it a one-pager.

beatcanvas on June 26, 2013 at 11:34 AM

Heck, 1 sentence: “We so authorize the establishment of land mines every 30 feet along the entire Mexican border and a sign that says “Get Your Food Stamps 50ft. Ahead” (in Spanish, of course)”.

hillsoftx on June 26, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Per Rasmussen’s new poll, fully 51 percent of likely voters say that immigration is now “very important” to how they’ll vote in the midterms. One Senate staffer in Roger Wicker’s office told the Daily Caller that they got 500 calls yesterday alone.

This is the only thing they care about. Don’t let up folks.

VegasRick on June 26, 2013 at 11:44 AM

Allahounsit’s coverage on this (and other things, especially lately) has been excellent. He is now once again my favorite blogger!

bluegill on June 26, 2013 at 11:46 AM

Why? Stop playing defense against the Democrat/media complex. If they want to push for amnesty for illegals at a time when the economy is still in the crapper and Obamacare is about to drop on us like an atomic bomb, let them. I can’t imagine a better contrast heading into the midterms than to have the Dems talking about this, gay marriage, gun control, and climate change while the GOP addresses issues that actually matter to voters.

Doughboy on June 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Yes.
Like how 50% of electricity is generated by coal and your utility bill just went way up because of Obama.
And you just lost your healthcare but are now subsidizing someone else’s. Thanks, Obamacare!
And how we’re unwilling to aggressively execute a war but but always willing to enter another.
And how your son, who lost out on the job to an illegal can join the Army to fight the new war.
And how your new clothes washer ain’t never gonna get your drawers clean.

M240H on June 26, 2013 at 11:48 AM

There is no good news. The Right needs to understand this. There is no good news. Not now, not with these people, not at this moment of agon. Boehner will steer through either this bill or a worse bill. That is simply the way of the world right now.

rrpjr on June 26, 2013 at 11:49 AM

I heard of a very simple solution to all of this:

Hand out temporary work visas to all illegals.

Bingo! They are now out of the “shadows”.

mjbrooks3 on June 26, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Killing the Gang of Eight bill and offering nothing in return is, shall we say, a “bad narrative” to hand to the media.

That we’re even in this position at all isn’t a Narrative — it’s worse. It’s a statement of truth, and a far worse one.

rrpjr on June 26, 2013 at 11:51 AM

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons

That is how this problem started…

we don’t want people living in shadows, do we?

mjbrooks3 on June 26, 2013 at 11:38 AM

This is what really hacks me off.

Everyone wants to act like these illegals are victims. As if someone kidnapped them off the side of a road in Mexico, drove them to El Paso or Tuscon, then kicked them out and said “Good luck”.

These people made the damn choice to come here and they knew they were breaking the law in so doing. And I don’t care that the reason for most was the noble cause of finding a job and providing for their families back in Mexico or wherever. Many immigrants have fallen into this category that went about the process legally. This whole kabuke theater is a slap in the face of those folks.

Bitter Clinger on June 26, 2013 at 11:52 AM

How about this very simple bill:

1. Secure the border.
2. Under penalty of impeachment for neglect, the president must enforce our current immigration laws.

That’s it. Make it a one-pager.

beatcanvas on June 26, 2013 at 11:34 AM

yeah, except it should have been in place back when-”You’re all vigilantes”, I want these open borders and I lied about my oath to enforce the nation’s laws, Bush was the president….

Don L on June 26, 2013 at 11:52 AM

Start with a border security only bill first.

And maybe a law that says ‘enforce the laws’.

TerryW on June 26, 2013 at 11:27 AM

Who can oppose a bill like that?

davidk on June 26, 2013 at 11:53 AM

I don’t believe Boehner because Paul Ryan is aldready working behind your backs to bring it…started yesterday.

However, if Boehner brings it up Pelosi takes the hammer in 2014, without a shred of doubt.

Schadenfreude on June 26, 2013 at 11:53 AM

And yet, we have Obamacare. Yes I know that he wasn’t Speaker but I don’t trust anyone.

Cindy Munford on June 26, 2013 at 11:53 AM

How about this very simple bill:

1. Secure the border.
2. Under penalty of impeachment for neglect, the president must enforce our current immigration laws.

That’s it. Make it a one-pager.

beatcanvas on June 26, 2013 at 11:34 AM

a one-page bill–with a thousand pages of pork. It’s what they do.

davidk on June 26, 2013 at 11:54 AM

OH. SENATORS Portman and Sherrie Brown – BOTH declined to vote YES for Senate immi bill, so……….

Boehner has precedent.

Lets see how Johnny B. stands up to the state run, Big media machine once our favorite country club marxist, B. Hussein, turns their propaganda guns on him.

Maybe even a little hint of tax audits…….perhaps ?

FlaMurph on June 26, 2013 at 11:56 AM

blockquote>Per Rasmussen’s new poll, fully 51 percent of likely voters say that immigration is now “very important” to how they’ll vote in the midterms. One Senate staffer in Roger Wicker’s office told the Daily Caller that they got 500 calls yesterday alone.

You will notice that BORDER SECURITY< was not one of the topics that was posed by Rasmussen.

National Survey of 1,000 Likely Voters

Conducted June 16-17, 2013

By Rasmussen Reports

1* I’m now going to read you a short list of issues in the news. For each, please tell me how important that issue is in terms of how you will vote in the next Congressional election.

Economy

Health Care

Job Creation

Government Ethics and Corruption

Government Spending

Taxes

Education

Social Security

Issues Affecting Small Business

Gun Control

Immigration

National Security and War on Terror

Energy Policy

Environment

War in Afghanistan

I call B.S. on Rasmussen’s Poll. Add Border Security to your list and re-sample, that is the poll I’d like to see the results from.

D-fusit on June 26, 2013 at 11:56 AM

This is the only thing they care about. Don’t let up folks.

VegasRick on June 26, 2013 at 11:44 AM

It’s not the only thing. But any office holder that tells you they don’t care about the letters and phone calls, is a liar…

JohnGalt23 on June 26, 2013 at 11:57 AM

From the link to the Palin article above:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, who has the most influence among conservative voters in Republican primaries, told Breitbart News on Tuesday that Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) should be primaried for their support of the Senate’s immigration bill.

Hm. There’s a line you won’t see written in a post on HotAir, or even excerpted from an article they link…

/s

Hehe.

As to immigration- Boehner’s statement is a bit of good news. However, to quote a much more trustworthy conservative leader: “Trust, but verify.” Watch’em closely, voters…

cs89 on June 26, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Heck, 1 sentence: “We so authorize the establishment of land mines every 30 feet along the entire Mexican border and a sign that says “Get Your Food Stamps 50ft. Ahead” (in Spanish, of course)”.

hillsoftx on June 26, 2013 at 11:44 AM

ROFL

Wait….will I get banned for laughing at that? If so I rescind my ROFL.

Bishop on June 26, 2013 at 11:57 AM

How about this very simple bill:

1. Secure the border.
2. Under penalty of impeachment for neglect, the president must enforce our current immigration laws.

That’s it. Make it a one-pager.

beatcanvas on June 26, 2013 at 11:34 AM

I agree it needs to be short and sweet (if we need anything at all). Anytime you have a thousand+ page monstrosity it means they’re hiding pork and bribes. But passing a law saying you really really need to obey the law, and we really mean it this time, is kind of silly.

The problem is the Congress puts too much power in the hands of bureaucrats, they write regulations instead of laws. My ideal bill would:

1) make e-verify mandatory, immediately
2) build the fence, put out bids, do it now
3) mandatory deportation for any illegal picked up for any reason after they’ve paid their debt to society for whatever they were picked up for.
4) no waivers or sliding timetables for any reason
5) no grant of regulatory powers to bureaucrats

It could be 5-10 pages or unrelated garbage. Okay, if you want to try and slip in abolishing the education dept. and DHS, I wouldn’t object to that.

Fenris on June 26, 2013 at 11:57 AM

^^ooops, I meant no unrelated garbage.

Fenris on June 26, 2013 at 11:58 AM

Killing the Gang of Eight bill and offering nothing in return is, shall we say, a “bad narrative” to hand to the media.

And that’s a major problem: Politicians more worried LSM hacks will say mean things about them and not invite them on their shows, instead of doing what’s best for the country.

Liam on June 26, 2013 at 12:00 PM

And where is the $Billions$ that were already allocated for building the damn fence after 1986 and post 9/11?

D-fusit on June 26, 2013 at 12:00 PM

If we are counting on Bonehead to save us from the communist agenda, we are screwed. His track record on being neutered by the Communists(aka Dems.)is worse than Lindsay Graham’s chances of getting married to a female.

they lie on June 26, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Here’s my immigration bill.

Anyone found to be in the country illegally will be assessed a penalty of $10k and shipped home immediately.

20M illegals at 10K a pop = $200B, a significant dent in the Obama deficits.

No, we won’t get that much honestly, but hey why not argue we will and if we collect something it will deter illegals anyway.

Oh, and a $1M penalty per illegal working for a company if they do not have valid ID on file.

18-1 on June 26, 2013 at 12:02 PM

Per Rasmussen’s new poll, fully 51 percent of likely voters say that immigration is now “very important” to how they’ll vote in the midterms.

2 Reasons this doesn’t mean anything

1. Rasumssen.
2. That 51% doesn’t mean they are pro-gang of 8…In fact, I would assume that most of the intensity is on the anti-Gang of 8 side.

ChrisL on June 26, 2013 at 12:03 PM

We must all hope that the People’s House acts with resolution and sends this bill to the garbage heap of liberal trash.

rplat on June 26, 2013 at 12:03 PM

What’s to stop the House from passing its own immigration bill, and then having it sent, along with the Senate bill, into conference?

I’m not sure about the parliamentary procedure there. If we really want to stop the Senate bill, we need to make sure that it doesn’t get into conference.

Revenant on June 26, 2013 at 12:05 PM

Start with a border security only bill first.

Let’s be clear. When we say border we mean actually recognizing what it means. Interior enforcement, jobs enforcement, no more birthright citizenship and of course direct border containment. Enforce the 1986 laws that were passed and ignored. Refusal to do so ought to be grounds for impeachment.

DanMan on June 26, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Don’t bring up any “House Versions”. The Senate bill is a freakin’ mess. Just shelve it for “consideration at a later date”, and funnel into the Closet of Unpassable Bills to languish for eternity.

Best thing the Senate did was to vote on it without reading it. Gave Boehner cover to toss it into the fire.

Nethicus on June 26, 2013 at 11:39 AM

On the other hand, the upside of bringing up the Senate version, once you’ve confirmed that it has no danger of passing, is that you can then spend weeks picking it apart and demonstrating to the nation how abominably bad it is. You might even surprise some Senators that voted for it.

slickwillie2001 on June 26, 2013 at 12:07 PM

“I think that they should be challenged…

“Marco Rubio has blatantly flip-flopped on his position on immigration, on amnesty, and border security,” Palin said to Gibson, before noting the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill he orchestrated would reward law breakers and give President Barack Obama “a victory in his mission to fundamentally transform America economically.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/26/Exclusive-Palin-Tells-Breitbart-News-Rubio-Ayotte-Should-Be-Primaried

F*ckin A.

rrpjr on June 26, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Revenant on June 26, 2013 at 12:05 PM

One word – OBAMACARE

Don’t you recall all of the parlimentary tricks they played to get that to pass. The only way to kill this beast is to put it in a closte and starve it.

D-fusit on June 26, 2013 at 12:09 PM

KEEP MELTING THE PHONES!!

1-202-224-3121

1-202-224-3121

1-202-224-3121

1-202-224-3121

1-202-224-3121

PappyD61 on June 26, 2013 at 12:12 PM

Doesn’t mean the House won’t pass something of its own, and it doesn’t mean something resembling the Gang of Eight bill won’t emerge from the conference committee later. But let’s appreciate good news while we have it.

Great point AP. Now Rush is so out of touch that he’s touting this as some great thing and it’s due to the calls.

This is just a Boehner/Reid/McConnell Trojan Horse. We know what Boehner is up to and the R House members better get up to speed, as well as Rush.

Good grief!! This isn’t our first Rodeo with caving Boehner!!

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:14 PM

That Boehner is one hard nosed tough customer……………

d1carter on June 26, 2013 at 12:15 PM

I don’t want the House putting something together, going into committed with Rubio/Schumer… and coming back as amnesty. Better to do NOTHING until Democrats no longer control the Senate. Which, thanks to 15 Republican votes this week, is not really likely for the foreseeable future.

It’s not like Republicans don’t have options that would allow for a small amount of amnesty to occur at some point down the road. But we’re going to have to see REAL border security with guarantees on enforcement, NO CHAIN MIGRATION, no welfare benefits utilized, and squeaky clean police records. I figure we’d end up with maybe a fourth of the number we’re talking about now qualifying, maybe less.

What it all boils down to is that the people who want our forgiveness need to have actually EARNED it already. And that means their neighbors and American taxpayers should be able to vouch for them.

Murf76 on June 26, 2013 at 12:20 PM

One Senate staffer in Roger Wicker’s office told the Daily Caller that they got 500 calls yesterday alone.

Yeah? Well one of Wicker’s Staff members told me Monday that the reason Wicker voted yes for Cloture was so they could offer amendments. Also, I hear that Wickers office aides/staffers are asking for names & addresses of callers. Otherwise they don’t take anonymous callers. This person was quite testy also and argumentative.

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Again, though: The House will, and really must, pass some sort of immigration reform of its own, if only for tactical reasons.

Yes, we conservatives support reform…

What “reform”? “Reform” implies that there is something wrong with immigration LAWS as they stand…laws that are ridiculously straightforward and rational:

1) If you want to immigrate to the US, fill out the appropriate paperwork and get in line.
2) If you come here illegally or overstay your visa, you are breaking the law and are subject to deportation upon arrest.

What’s wrong with those laws?

Nothing.

Stop falling for the Left’s meme machine.

1. Secure the border

2. Arrest and deport those here illegally that are caught.

The end.

If anything other than that is passed into law, the Republican party will have assisted it’s passage; as such, if that occurs, I will NEVER vote for another Republican again, regardless of the candidate is and regardless of who the opposing candidate is.

This far…no further.

rvastar on June 26, 2013 at 12:21 PM

Someone needed to tell Rubio to “pound sand”…

Thank You Speaker Boehner ! :)

BigSven on June 26, 2013 at 11:36 AM

Yeah.

Gives conservatives more time to get the correct message out.

On a + side…Traditionally Religious Hispanics are gonna have to make a choice & so will traditionally religious Blacks.

I expect both the Baptists and the Catholics will make hay about religious liberty & moral decay in the pulpits this sunday.

workingclass artist on June 26, 2013 at 12:22 PM

My plan of attack is to take a look at Roll Call Votes for bills in the House that Boehner caved on. That way, I’ll know which R members voted along with Boehner and know who to call.

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:23 PM

cs89 on June 26, 2013 at 11:57 AM

As a matter of fact, it has been said. She’s a lying sack.

dogsoldier on June 26, 2013 at 12:28 PM

KEEP MELTING THE PHONES!!

1-202-224-3121

1-202-224-3121

1-202-224-3121

1-202-224-3121

1-202-224-3121

PappyD61 on June 26, 2013 at 12:12 PM

More pressure.

Jackalope on June 26, 2013 at 12:29 PM

This is another reason why I rarely watch Faux news. This AM Rubio was on, touting the great benefits of the gangster of 8′s amnesty bill….border security, more agents, more (single, which doesn’t work) fencing. Did Faux News Bill Hemmer once ask about the massive earmarks in this bill, which all bloated politicians love? Not a single one: alaskan fisheries, Las Vegas tourism, $1.5 billion of taxpayer monies for stimulus/jobs that must be spent in 15 months & may include free cars, bicycles, & scooters.

http://www.theglobaldispatch.com/immigration-bill-includes-amendment-to-give-away-free-cars-bicycles-scooters-to-young-people-as-jobs-stimulus-49341/

Belle on June 26, 2013 at 12:30 PM

I really want to get excited, and I want to have a glimmer of hope; however, with that bunch in Washington, my trust is very weak to say the least.

mobydutch on June 26, 2013 at 12:32 PM

What’s to stop the House from passing its own immigration bill, and then having it sent, along with the Senate bill, into conference?

I’m not sure about the parliamentary procedure there. If we really want to stop the Senate bill, we need to make sure that it doesn’t get into conference.

Revenant on June 26, 2013 at 12:05 PM

That is exactly what Boehner is planning. Paul Ryan said so on Mark Levin a week ago! And Rand Paul said, quote: It is now up to the House to champion real immigration reform. If we’re going to fix our broken borders and overhaul the system, the House will have to lead the way;

http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2013/06/26/why-im-voting-no-on-immigration-reform/#comments

In other words, Rand Paul wants the House to bring up a bill!!
That is exactly what Boehner/Reid/McConnell want!!

What is in the water in D.C.? I know, money.

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:33 PM

They pass anything we get screwed in conference

El_Terrible on June 26, 2013 at 12:35 PM

Revenant on June 26, 2013 at 12:05 PM
One word – OBAMACARE

Don’t you recall all of the parlimentary tricks they played to get that to pass. The only way to kill this beast is to put it in a closte and starve it.

D-fusit on June 26, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Yes, but that’s not what Boehner is saying — he’s saying that he won’t bring the Senate bill up for a vote, but the House will move forward with its own legislation. In part, this is to prevent a “bad narrative.”

So, lets assume the House makes its own bill, which is centered on enforcement, and then passes that bill.

My question is — what is to prevent the Senate version and the House version from being sent to conference together, where, presumably, the House version will be gutted?

If there is a conference, the amount of pressure on House republicans to hold a vote on whatever emerges will be immense. The trick is not to let it go that far, while at the same time slowly working on a House immigration bill so that the narrative doesn’t entirely work against House republicans.

Revenant on June 26, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Heck, 1 sentence: “We so authorize the establishment of land mines every 30 feet along the entire Mexican border and a sign that says “Get Your Food Stamps 50ft. Ahead” (in Spanish, of course)”.

hillsoftx on June 26, 2013 at 11:44 AM

ROFL

Wait….will I get banned for laughing at that? If so I rescind my ROFL.

Bishop on June 26, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Twerp needs company.

hillsoftx on June 26, 2013 at 12:36 PM

If we had a Speaker that represented the Citizens, he would just table the Senate bill. And don’t bring up any Immigration related bill.

That would end it. Let it die on the vine, the same way Reid does with any Budget bills the House sends to the Senate. Make it D.O.A.

We need a new Speaker and God willing we’ll get one. And don’t mention Cantor or McCarthy, who are both Boehner twins:-)

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:39 PM

And how your new clothes washer ain’t never gonna get your drawers clean.

M240H on June 26, 2013 at 11:48 AM

Don’t get me started on toilets.

Paul-Cincy on June 26, 2013 at 12:40 PM

Wait….will I get banned for laughing at that? If so I rescind my ROFL.

Bishop on June 26, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Twerp needs company.

hillsoftx on June 26, 2013 at 12:36 PM

So funny, LOL

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:40 PM

I nominate RWM for President, V.P., Majority Leader of the Senate and Speaker of the House.

We’re taking suggestions for her Cabinet by the way.

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:42 PM

I think that the answer may be to really slow-walk any House immigration bill. That means have lots and lots of hearings. Take lots and lots of inconsistent testimony and build a records that’s tens of thousands of pages.

Then preempt those proceedings whenever something else comes up, like work on the budget. The goal is for the House to take months and months before taking each step, and then have the process preempted by the midterm election.

When the new Congress is sworn in, the Senate bill gets thrown into the trash can. Obama is really a lame duck at that point, and nothing is done, while Washington is infused with the pretense of doing something.

Revenant on June 26, 2013 at 12:42 PM

Oh please.

Boner has sat around with the consultants and aides and asked how he can pass a bill without the knuckle-dragging teabaggers getting angry.

Pretending to act tough and rejecting the Senate bill is just the 1st stage of the charade.

mudskipper on June 26, 2013 at 12:44 PM

Land mines are a little over the top, but I do believe in private enterprise. Congress could issue letters of marque for adventurous souls who wish to venture just over the border into Mexico and do a little anticipatory law enforcement.

Fenris on June 26, 2013 at 12:45 PM

Have calls to make and errands to run. BBL to see if you all have solved this:-)

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:46 PM

I don’t know why our fearless feckless leaders are going through the formality of running laws through the legislature.

Obama can do anything he wants by Executive Order. Why not just run it by him so everyone can go home early for their summer recess?

bigbeachbird on June 26, 2013 at 12:48 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/26/Exclusive-Palin-Tells-Breitbart-News-Rubio-Ayotte-Should-Be-Primaried

F*ckin A.

rrpjr on June 26, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Anyone have a theory on who got to Rubio and Ayotte? Why does someone flip flop on their campaign promise?

Paul-Cincy on June 26, 2013 at 12:53 PM

“I think that they should be challenged…

“Marco Rubio has blatantly flip-flopped on his position on immigration, on amnesty, and border security,” Palin said to Gibson, before noting the Senate’s Gang of Eight bill he orchestrated would reward law breakers and give President Barack Obama “a victory in his mission to fundamentally transform America economically.”

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/26/Exclusive-Palin-Tells-Breitbart-News-Rubio-Ayotte-Should-Be-Primaried

F*ckin A.

rrpjr on June 26, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Hannity’s head sploded…I heard it all the way down here in Texas.

*snicker*

workingclass artist on June 26, 2013 at 12:55 PM

hillsoftx on June 26, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Twerp is back. Doing fine.

That is, if it really IS twerp.

IlikedAUH2O on June 26, 2013 at 12:56 PM

Anyone have a theory on who got to Rubio and Ayotte? Why does someone flip flop on their campaign promise?

Paul-Cincy on June 26, 2013 at 12:53 PM

And you thought NSA was harmless.

IlikedAUH2O on June 26, 2013 at 12:57 PM

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/06/26/Exclusive-Palin-Tells-Breitbart-News-Rubio-Ayotte-Should-Be-Primaried

F*ckin A.

rrpjr on June 26, 2013 at 12:07 PM

Anyone have a theory on who got to Rubio and Ayotte? Why does someone flip flop on their campaign promise?

Paul-Cincy on June 26, 2013 at 12:53 PM

Big Businesses like Walmart and Tech Industries etc. is behind this…They want cheap labor.

Their excuse is “Hey it’s tough competing with slave economies or something…”

so there’s that.

workingclass artist on June 26, 2013 at 12:59 PM

dogsoldier on June 26, 2013 at 12:28 PM

??

cs89 on June 26, 2013 at 1:00 PM

bluefox on June 26, 2013 at 12:20 PM

Bluefox, easy fix to that problem. Go to zillow.com, find a house for rent in their state, write down the address and have the area code too. It takes some time but that’s what I’ve done. Since I work I have to leave messages at night but yesterday got home in time to call baucus’ MT office. Told the aide hubby and I retired there from TX due to all the illegals and this bill will be devastating. . She asked for all my info and voila. They usually just ask for the zip though. And always push *67 first.

TxAnn56 on June 26, 2013 at 1:02 PM

This is all part of the pre-planned theater folks. This is how Boner plans to get something/anything through the house. It will then go to committee and get merged with senate bill, and out will come a big ole smelly cowpie for all of us!.

paulsur on June 26, 2013 at 1:21 PM

cs89 on June 26, 2013 at 1:00 PM

I replied to your post about people posting Ayotte should be primaried and more.

dogsoldier on June 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM

When the “government” refuses to enforce duly passed and enacted laws, that “government” publicly declares itself illegitimate.
The “People” are then entitled, without fear of reprisal, to install a new government that will be true to the Constitution and duly enacted laws.
Individuals who swear allegiance to the Republic and the Constitution, and who demonstrate their fealty to the Constitution by their records and actions, are eligible to be members of said government.

Please continue with this idea….to be delivered to members of the present illegitimate government.
III/0317

dirtengineer on June 26, 2013 at 1:24 PM

The weakness this administration has brought upon the US People will lead to many more wiki leaks and Snowdens to come. It all seems so intentional, to demoralize the American public. The admin is preparing for what they are causing with arms.

Egfrow on June 26, 2013 at 1:25 PM

ROFL

Wait….will I get banned for laughing at that? If so I rescind my ROFL.

Bishop on June 26, 2013 at 11:57 AM

Just apologize if anyone was offended. Works for leftists

davidk on June 26, 2013 at 1:27 PM

When the “government” refuses to enforce duly passed and enacted laws, that “government” publicly declares itself illegitimate.
The “People” are then entitled, without fear of reprisal, to install a new government that will be true to the Constitution and duly enacted laws.
Individuals who swear allegiance to the Republic and the Constitution, and who demonstrate their fealty to the Constitution by their records and actions, are eligible to be members of said government.

Please continue with this idea….to be delivered to members of the present illegitimate government.

We have this already… that’s what Elections are for (and, perhaps impeachment proceedings).

Essentially the Prop 8 decision is saying that the remedy for supporters of these kinds of ballot decisions is to vote out the government actors who refuse to enforce them after they’re passed (or to defend them in court).

Revenant on June 26, 2013 at 1:36 PM

Comment pages: 1 2