Jihadin wrote:

We did at a time have Active Military on the border for LPOP and AZ activated some National Guard troops though they are legally authorized to handle illegal aliens

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

Comprehensive Imigration Reform is never going to happen, not with the crazy that is currently going on and the whole "kick out anybody that even thinks about amnesty" thread from the Tea Party.

Pretending that we can round up and kick out every illegal immigrant currently here is just as stupid as pretending that we can just pass gun control and round up every illegal gun. But that doesn't stop people from being anti-amnesty and so nothing will happen.

It'll never happen when the crazies won't enforce the fething borders and enforce existing immigration laws.

Which doesn't have anything to do with any kind of amnesty package.

Que?

If the voters can be assured that the government is doing what they can on the border AND enforce existing immigrations laws.... I'm sure a reasonable discussion can be had about the existing immigrants in this country.


Until then? Why bother?

.... I'm sure a reasonable discussion can be had about the existing immigrants in this country.

reasonable discussion

 d-usa wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

We did at a time have Active Military on the border for LPOP and AZ activated some National Guard troops though they are legally authorized to handle illegal aliens

I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

But the moment we activate the national guard and use active duty troops to march through the streets and kicking down doors to search all the houses for illegals there would be trouble.

 Easy E wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

Comprehensive Imigration Reform is never going to happen, not with the crazy that is currently going on and the whole "kick out anybody that even thinks about amnesty" thread from the Tea Party.

Pretending that we can round up and kick out every illegal immigrant currently here is just as stupid as pretending that we can just pass gun control and round up every illegal gun. But that doesn't stop people from being anti-amnesty and so nothing will happen.

It'll never happen when the crazies won't enforce the fething borders and enforce existing immigration laws.

Which doesn't have anything to do with any kind of amnesty package.

Que?

If the voters can be assured that the government is doing what they can on the border AND enforce existing immigrations laws.... I'm sure a reasonable discussion can be had about the existing immigrants in this country.


Until then? Why bother?

.... I'm sure a reasonable discussion can be had about the existing immigrants in this country.

reasonable discussion

Funniest thing I have seen all day.

 Jihadin wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

We did at a time have Active Military on the border for LPOP and AZ activated some National Guard troops though they are legally authorized to handle illegal aliens

I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

But the moment we activate the national guard and use active duty troops to march through the streets and kicking down doors to search all the houses for illegals there would be trouble.

Whoa now D. I've only seen that when there are Insurgents involve.

 d-usa wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

We did at a time have Active Military on the border for LPOP and AZ activated some National Guard troops though they are legally authorized to handle illegal aliens

I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

But the moment we activate the national guard and use active duty troops to march through the streets and kicking down doors to search all the houses for illegals there would be trouble.

Whoa now D. I've only seen that when there are Insurgents involve.

And that is what we would have to do all across the entire country if we wanted to pretend that we could get rid of illegal immigrants already in the country.

That's why "no amnesty, kick out all the illegals" is a stupid argument. But as long as people who want to pretend that we can do it keep on voting everybody that disagrees out of office we will never have any kind of immigration reform because you can't have comprehensive reform without a component of amnesty.

The ironic thing is that the same crowd that bitches and moans about how we have to kick out all the illegals is also the same crowd that would rise up into their favorite militias the moment the government does what it would have to do to actually kick the illegals out.

"Hey government, please kick out everybody that shouldn't be here, but please don't do it all police-state like. 'kthanxs."

 streamdragon wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:
I can only begin to imagine the gak fit that would be thrown if a president mobilized the army along the border to try to stop illegal immigrants. That anyone thinks it even begins to approach a viable solution is insanity of the highest order.

You mean, like Mexico does on its southern border???

Considering how many of the Mexican army are probably in Cartel pockets and HELPING the people traffic...

The last time the US military was used like law enforcement in the US, thousands of Japanese families were rounded up and placed in internment camps. It is rightly considered a stain on US military history.

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

We did at a time have Active Military on the border for LPOP and AZ activated some National Guard troops though they are legally authorized to handle illegal aliens

I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

But the moment we activate the national guard and use active duty troops to march through the streets and kicking down doors to search all the houses for illegals there would be trouble.

Whoa now D. I've only seen that when there are Insurgents involve.

And that is what we would have to do all across the entire country if we wanted to pretend that we could get rid of illegal immigrants already in the country.

That's why "no amnesty, kick out all the illegals" is a stupid argument. But as long as people who want to pretend that we can do it keep on voting everybody that disagrees out of office we will never have any kind of immigration reform because you can't have comprehensive reform without a component of amnesty.

The ironic thing is that the same crowd that bitches and moans about how we have to kick out all the illegals is also the same crowd that would rise up into their favorite militias the moment the government does what it would have to do to actually kick the illegals out.

"Hey government, please kick out everybody that shouldn't be here, but please don't do it all police-state like. 'kthanxs."

Dude.

That's some serious mental projection there.

Just enforce the fething laws that we have here.

That is NOT an unreasonable position to take.

EDIT: besides... this is a thread about Cantor losing... not immigration reforms. o.O

 Jihadin wrote:
We have to declare the Illegal Immigrants as domestic enemy which is not going to happen
Then we fall into lawful to unlawful orders. US Military is not "Blind Obedience"

 Frazzled wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:
I can only begin to imagine the gak fit that would be thrown if a president mobilized the army along the border to try to stop illegal immigrants. That anyone thinks it even begins to approach a viable solution is insanity of the highest order.

You mean, like Mexico does on its southern border???

Considering how many of the Mexican army are probably in Cartel pockets and HELPING the people traffic...

The last time the US military was used like law enforcement in the US, thousands of Japanese families were rounded up and placed in internment camps. It is rightly considered a stain on US military history.

And before that Black Jack Pershing. Border enforcement is not law enforcement.

Ask the Romans. Or the Knight's Watch.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the internment with Executive Order 9066, issued February 19, 1942, which allowed local military commanders to designate "military areas" as "exclusion zones," from which "any or all persons may be excluded." This power was used to declare that all people of Japanese ancestry were excluded from the entire Pacific coast, including all of California and much of Oregon, Washington and Arizona, except for those in internment camps.[7] In 1944, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion orders.[8] The Court limited its decision to the validity of the exclusion orders, adding, "The provisions of other orders requiring persons of Japanese ancestry to report to assembly centers and providing for the detention of such persons in assembly and relocation centers were separate, and their validity is not in issue in this proceeding."[9] The United States Census Bureau assisted the internment efforts by providing confidential neighborhood information on Japanese Americans. The Bureau denied its role for decades, but it was finally proven in 2007

Eight U.S. Department of Justice Camps (in Texas, Idaho, North Dakota, New Mexico, and Montana) held Japanese Americans, primarily non-citizens and their families.[56] The camps were run by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, under the umbrella of the DOJ, and guarded by Border Patrol agents rather than military police. The population of these camps included approximately 3,800 of the 5,500 Buddhist and Christian ministers, Japanese language school instructors, newspaper workers, fishermen, and community leaders who had been accused of fifth column activity and arrested by the FBI after Pearl Harbor. (The remaining 1,700 were released to WRA relocation centers.)[57] Immigrants and citizens of German and Italian ancestry were also held in these facilities, often in the same camps as Japanese Americans. Approximately 7,000 German Americans and 3,000 Italian Americans from Hawai'i and the U.S. mainland were interned in DOJ camps, along with 500 German seamen already in custody after being rescued from the SS Columbus in 1938.[17] In addition 2,264 ethnic Japanese,[18] 4,058 ethnic Germans, and 288 ethnic Italians[17] were deported from 19 Latin American countries for a later-abandoned hostage exchange program with Axis countries or confinement in DOJ camps.[58]
Friends say good-bye as family of Japanese ancestry await evacuation bus. Hayward, California, 8 May 1942

Several U.S. Army internment camps held Japanese, Italian and German American men considered "potentially dangerous." Camp Lordsburg, in New Mexico, was the only site built specifically to confine Japanese Americans. In May 1943, the Army was given responsibility for the detention of prisoners of war and all internees were transferred to DOJ camps.

In 1944, the U. S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the exclusion order (in re Korematsu vs United States, 1944). In two other earlier Supreme Court cases related to the exclusion order (in re Yashui vs United States and Hirabayashi vs United States, both 1943 and challenging the constitutionality of curfews imposed based on Japanese ancestry) the Court also upheld the Executive Order’s constitutionality.

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:

We did at a time have Active Military on the border for LPOP and AZ activated some National Guard troops though they are legally authorized to handle illegal aliens

I don't think there is anything wrong with that.

But the moment we activate the national guard and use active duty troops to march through the streets and kicking down doors to search all the houses for illegals there would be trouble.

Whoa now D. I've only seen that when there are Insurgents involve.

And that is what we would have to do all across the entire country if we wanted to pretend that we could get rid of illegal immigrants already in the country.

That's why "no amnesty, kick out all the illegals" is a stupid argument. But as long as people who want to pretend that we can do it keep on voting everybody that disagrees out of office we will never have any kind of immigration reform because you can't have comprehensive reform without a component of amnesty.

The ironic thing is that the same crowd that bitches and moans about how we have to kick out all the illegals is also the same crowd that would rise up into their favorite militias the moment the government does what it would have to do to actually kick the illegals out.

"Hey government, please kick out everybody that shouldn't be here, but please don't do it all police-state like. 'kthanxs."

Dude.

That's some serious mental projection there.

Just enforce the fething laws that we have here.

That is NOT an unreasonable position to take.

EDIT: besides... this is a thread about Cantor losing... not immigration reforms. o.O

1) nobody is saying "don't enforce the laws we already have"
2) what issue was his opponent running on?
3) imigration reform has to address what we are going to do with the people already here "aka do we report everybody or give them amnesty"


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jihadin wrote:
We have to declare the Illegal Immigrants as domestic enemy which is not going to happen
Then we fall into lawful to unlawful orders. US Military is not "Blind Obedience"

How do we get rid of every single illegal in this country?

 d-usa wrote:
Sealing the border is not going to do anything to deport a single illegal that is already here. It is also completely irrelevant to the question of what to do with the illegals that are already in the country.

I'm not saying "we should utilize the military to kick them out". I'm saying that it's impossible to kick them all out because we would have to mobilize law enforcement and the military to even have a shot at doing that and that nobody would be okay with that, especially the "kick everyone out" crowd.

 Easy E wrote:

Spoiler:

 whembly wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

Comprehensive Imigration Reform is never going to happen, not with the crazy that is currently going on and the whole "kick out anybody that even thinks about amnesty" thread from the Tea Party.

Pretending that we can round up and kick out every illegal immigrant currently here is just as stupid as pretending that we can just pass gun control and round up every illegal gun. But that doesn't stop people from being anti-amnesty and so nothing will happen.

It'll never happen when the crazies won't enforce the fething borders and enforce existing immigration laws.

Which doesn't have anything to do with any kind of amnesty package.

Que?

If the voters can be assured that the government is doing what they can on the border AND enforce existing immigrations laws.... I'm sure a reasonable discussion can be had about the existing immigrants in this country.


Until then? Why bother?

.... I'm sure a reasonable discussion can be had about the existing immigrants in this country.

reasonable discussion

Funniest thing I have seen all day.

Hey... exactly what have I been unreasonable about??

Not directed at you. The idea that we will have a reasonable national discussion about Immigration is hilarious to me.

 d-usa wrote:
Sealing the border is not going to do anything to deport a single illegal that is already here. It is also completely irrelevant to the question of what to do with the illegals that are already in the country.

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Sealing the border is not going to do anything to deport a single illegal that is already here. It is also completely irrelevant to the question of what to do with the illegals that are already in the country.

I'm not saying "we should utilize the military to kick them out". I'm saying that it's impossible to kick them all out because we would have to mobilize law enforcement and the military to even have a shot at doing that and that nobody would be okay with that, especially the "kick everyone out" crowd.

I just find it very ironic that you're very much aligned with groups like the US Chamber of Commerce (aka Establisment Republicans) in this ordeal.

A) First, seal the border.

B) Secondly, fething enforce existing laws. That is, go after businesses that knowingly hire illegals... turn off Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cites... etc...

C) Then, and ONLY then, we can discuss amnesty for the rest. That can be as simple as filling out a form in your desired state AND pay a fine.

 Jihadin wrote:
So your for no attempts to lessen the flow into the US through its border eh. So when is enough?

 Jihadin wrote:
So your for no attempts to lessen the flow into the US through its border eh. So when is enough?

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Sealing the border is not going to do anything to deport a single illegal that is already here. It is also completely irrelevant to the question of what to do with the illegals that are already in the country.

I'm not saying "we should utilize the military to kick them out". I'm saying that it's impossible to kick them all out because we would have to mobilize law enforcement and the military to even have a shot at doing that and that nobody would be okay with that, especially the "kick everyone out" crowd.

I just find it very ironic that you're very much aligned with groups like the US Chamber of Commerce (aka Establisment Republicans) in this ordeal.

A) First, seal the border.

B) Secondly, fething enforce existing laws. That is, go after businesses that knowingly hire illegals... turn off Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cites... etc...

C) Then, and ONLY then, we can discuss amnesty for the rest. That can be as simple as filling out a form in your desired state AND pay a fine.

And any reform that gives more power to do A and B (which it should) is going to fail because of C.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Sealing the border is not going to do anything to deport a single illegal that is already here. It is also completely irrelevant to the question of what to do with the illegals that are already in the country.

I don't really agree with a "blanket amnesty" either... I mean, what percentage of illegal alien is a fugitive/criminal in their native land? how many of THOSE have gone on to commit major crimes in the US, and get incarcerated?

We really could solve a few birds with fewer stones with some form of amnesty program, but I think in order to make some happy, we'd necessarily have to ship foreign criminals out of here.

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Sealing the border is not going to do anything to deport a single illegal that is already here. It is also completely irrelevant to the question of what to do with the illegals that are already in the country.

I'm not saying "we should utilize the military to kick them out". I'm saying that it's impossible to kick them all out because we would have to mobilize law enforcement and the military to even have a shot at doing that and that nobody would be okay with that, especially the "kick everyone out" crowd.

I just find it very ironic that you're very much aligned with groups like the US Chamber of Commerce (aka Establisment Republicans) in this ordeal.

A) First, seal the border.

B) Secondly, fething enforce existing laws. That is, go after businesses that knowingly hire illegals... turn off Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cites... etc...

C) Then, and ONLY then, we can discuss amnesty for the rest. That can be as simple as filling out a form in your desired state AND pay a fine.

And any reform that gives more power to do A and B (which it should) is going to fail because of C.

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Sealing the border is not going to do anything to deport a single illegal that is already here. It is also completely irrelevant to the question of what to do with the illegals that are already in the country.

I'm not saying "we should utilize the military to kick them out". I'm saying that it's impossible to kick them all out because we would have to mobilize law enforcement and the military to even have a shot at doing that and that nobody would be okay with that, especially the "kick everyone out" crowd.

I just find it very ironic that you're very much aligned with groups like the US Chamber of Commerce (aka Establisment Republicans) in this ordeal.

A) First, seal the border.

B) Secondly, fething enforce existing laws. That is, go after businesses that knowingly hire illegals... turn off Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cites... etc...

C) Then, and ONLY then, we can discuss amnesty for the rest. That can be as simple as filling out a form in your desired state AND pay a fine.

And any reform that gives more power to do A and B (which it should) is going to fail because of C.

That doesn't make any sense.

The power to do both A & B is already THE LAW.

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Sealing the border is not going to do anything to deport a single illegal that is already here. It is also completely irrelevant to the question of what to do with the illegals that are already in the country.

I'm not saying "we should utilize the military to kick them out". I'm saying that it's impossible to kick them all out because we would have to mobilize law enforcement and the military to even have a shot at doing that and that nobody would be okay with that, especially the "kick everyone out" crowd.

I just find it very ironic that you're very much aligned with groups like the US Chamber of Commerce (aka Establisment Republicans) in this ordeal.

A) First, seal the border.

B) Secondly, fething enforce existing laws. That is, go after businesses that knowingly hire illegals... turn off Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cites... etc...

C) Then, and ONLY then, we can discuss amnesty for the rest. That can be as simple as filling out a form in your desired state AND pay a fine.

And any reform that gives more power to do A and B (which it should) is going to fail because of C.

That doesn't make any sense.

The power to do both A & B is already THE LAW.

So we don't need any immigration reform then? That's weird, because you said we do.

 Grey Templar wrote:
And we could kick most of the illegals out if we actually tried. Bring in the army to help and it could be done. It wouldn't be a popular decision, but it is physically possible. Realistically no, but physically yes.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Tell me why we couldn't do it then?

What exactly makes it impossible to remove at least a large portion of illegals if we had all the manpower you could need?

 Grey Templar wrote:
But it could be done is all I'm saying.

I'm not saying it would be ultimately successful or that it would get everyone(that would be impossible)

but saying we couldn't get rid of a bunch of the illegals if we tried is just false.

No, it wouldn't be a good idea.

 Ouze wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
And we could kick most of the illegals out if we actually tried. Bring in the army to help and it could be done. It wouldn't be a popular decision, but it is physically possible. Realistically no, but physically yes.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Tell me why we couldn't do it then?

What exactly makes it impossible to remove at least a large portion of illegals if we had all the manpower you could need?

Because the military is prohibited from a law enforcement role unless there's an insurrection, or natural disaster? How do you not know this?

 Grey Templar wrote:
But it could be done is all I'm saying.

I'm not saying it would be ultimately successful or that it would get everyone(that would be impossible)

but saying we couldn't get rid of a bunch of the illegals if we tried is just false.

No, it wouldn't be a good idea.

Oh, you don't support this idea. You're just throwing out a really incendiary, provocative argument that you don't actually believe and admit won't work to see the reactions? I believe there's a word for that.

 whembly wrote:

First, seal the border.

 whembly wrote:

Secondly, fething enforce existing laws. That is, go after businesses that knowingly hire illegals... turn off Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cites... etc...

Then, and ONLY then, we can discuss amnesty for the rest. That can be as simple as filling out a form in your desired state AND pay a fine.

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:

First, seal the border.

I don't think it sets a good precedent to allow a British musician to control a US border.

Then again, Kiss from a Rose would likely remind any potential illegal of Batman Forever, and send them running to the hills; into the iron maiden that is Mexico.

 whembly wrote:

Secondly, fething enforce existing laws. That is, go after businesses that knowingly hire illegals... turn off Federal Funds to Sanctuary Cites... etc...

Then, and ONLY then, we can discuss amnesty for the rest. That can be as simple as filling out a form in your desired state AND pay a fine.

Why can't those 2 happen concomitantly?