• Home
  • Today
  • Advocacy
  • Forum
Donate
  • login
  • register
Home

They need you!

Forum links

  • Recent changes
  • Member list
  • Search
  • Register
Search Forums
 
Advanced Search
Go to Page...

Resources

  • Do I qualify?
  • In-state tuition
  • FAQ
  • Ways to legalize
  • Feedback
  • Contact us

Join our list

National calendar of events

«  

June

  »
S M T W T F S
 
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10
 
11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
 
 
 
 
Sync with this calendar
DAP Forums > DREAM Act > The News Room

NJ Sen. Robert Menendez seeks support for immigration reform bill - Page 2

  • View
  • Post new reply
  • Thread tools
  • ‹ previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • next ›
#11
01-05-2011, 04:23 PM
BANNED
Joined in Dec 2010
374 posts
theboys2010
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by DA User View Post
Once we secure the borders, he is for it.

Graham will never be for it because they will never give Obama the credit for securing the border and lets say the border is secure whose determination of it being secure is going to get credit to use in the next election. In my State of Texas we have additional 4 seats coming to our state, we here in Texas do immigration better than anyone. Not only IMO but President Clinton said this in a State of the Union address about the immigration issue. But to continue to say Graham whose electorate will noway in hell let him get behind this again is a person to work with is just foolish.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
theboys2010
View Public Profile
Find all posts by theboys2010
#12
01-05-2011, 08:15 PM
BANNED
Joined in May 2009
6,763 posts
DA User
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by theboys2010 View Post
Graham will never be for it because they will never give Obama the credit for securing the border and lets say the border is secure whose determination of it being secure is going to get credit to use in the next election. In my State of Texas we have additional 4 seats coming to our state, we here in Texas do immigration better than anyone. Not only IMO but President Clinton said this in a State of the Union address about the immigration issue. But to continue to say Graham whose electorate will noway in hell let him get behind this again is a person to work with is just foolish.
He was for it with Schumer last year. So I think something can be worked out. Senate isn't the issue now. We need to work on House to get it to pass.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
DA User
View Public Profile
Find all posts by DA User
#13
01-05-2011, 08:38 PM
BANNED
Joined in Dec 2010
374 posts
theboys2010
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by DA User View Post
He was for it with Schumer last year. So I think something can be worked out. Senate isn't the issue now. We need to work on House to get it to pass.

You need the courts these issues need to be taken to the Supreme court once they make a law no politicians or president can even challenge it. Its the only way these days of the political games need to end. And along with this even though the supreme court is only suppose to act by the letter of the constitution for some reason in the past 20 years they have also included the feel of the country in there decisions. Hence this past ruling that Corporate money is free speech which of course Obama attacked during his state of the Union .I dont agree on a lot of his crap he was right in calling them out because Corporate donations is not free speech its one voter per person not Corporate money outspends the other candidate. So even though it was completely un presidential and never has happened before he was right in doing so. But since the Supreme court is putting the country's feel as as one of the decision factors that it is imperative the tone of the Dream act and Cir is of low tone without any hostile words because the Supreme court will not rule in favor of anarchy in any matter.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
theboys2010
View Public Profile
Find all posts by theboys2010
#14
01-06-2011, 12:08 AM
Senior Member
Joined in Jan 2010
249 posts
Eddy117's Avatar
Eddy117
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by DA User View Post
Once we secure the borders, he is for it.
I don't mean to sound like a douche...but how many times were you dropped as a baby? The borders will never-EVER-be secure enough for the GOP. You could have a fence a la East Germany, double layered with a moat in the middle containing mines, sharks with laser beams attached to their heads and it still wouldn't be secure enough. Lest we have a shift to the center by the GOP, the fringe will keep on demanding for "secure" borders before any immigration reform. Hell most of us dont ask automatic citizenship or residency-Personally I would much rather see a streamlined process where people didn't have to wait up to 20 years for a freaking working permit or 10 years to re-unite with family, then there wouldn't be an illegal immigration problem anymore.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
Eddy117
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Eddy117
Find all posts by Eddy117
#15
01-06-2011, 12:21 AM
BANNED
Joined in Dec 2010
374 posts
theboys2010
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy117 View Post
I don't mean to sound like a douche...but how many times were you dropped as a baby? The borders will never-EVER-be secure enough for the GOP. You could have a fence a la East Germany, double layered with a moat in the middle containing mines, sharks with laser beams attached to their heads and it still wouldn't be secure enough. Lest we have a shift to the center by the GOP, the fringe will keep on demanding for "secure" borders before any immigration reform. Hell most of us dont ask automatic citizenship or residency-Personally I would much rather see a streamlined process where people didn't have to wait up to 20 years for a freaking working permit or 10 years to re-unite with family, then there wouldn't be an illegal immigration problem anymore.
DA User has not been dropped on her head she leads with here heart and optimism which is going to break her heart every time in this issue. You cant tell people how to go about life because of they way they want to look at it. I try even though all the bad stuff I have seen in my 27 years to think positive every day so I kind of envy DA User that can feel for things more than others,

Anyway you are right though secure borders is only a moving target that will not be reached till you have the military there or national guard fence down the whole 2000 miles added along with , no chain migration, E verify, no students under probably 24, no college aid, etc I think that is when they will finally say the border is secure to pass the Dream act on a very limited scale. The country feels burned by Reagan not for giving amnesty to 4 million but they never did the enforcement part which led to 14-18 million more illegals coming to the country. So when the citizens know this is not going to happen again they will make a move.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
theboys2010
View Public Profile
Find all posts by theboys2010
#16
01-06-2011, 01:02 AM
BANNED
Joined in May 2009
6,763 posts
DA User
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by theboys2010 View Post
You need the courts these issues need to be taken to the Supreme court once they make a law no politicians or president can even challenge it. Its the only way these days of the political games need to end. And along with this even though the supreme court is only suppose to act by the letter of the constitution for some reason in the past 20 years they have also included the feel of the country in there decisions. Hence this past ruling that Corporate money is free speech which of course Obama attacked during his state of the Union .I dont agree on a lot of his crap he was right in calling them out because Corporate donations is not free speech its one voter per person not Corporate money outspends the other candidate. So even though it was completely un presidential and never has happened before he was right in doing so. But since the Supreme court is putting the country's feel as as one of the decision factors that it is imperative the tone of the Dream act and Cir is of low tone without any hostile words because the Supreme court will not rule in favor of anarchy in any matter.
Well, it still has to go through Congress.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
DA User
View Public Profile
Find all posts by DA User
#17
01-06-2011, 01:05 AM
BANNED
Joined in May 2009
6,763 posts
DA User
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eddy117 View Post
I don't mean to sound like a douche...but how many times were you dropped as a baby? The borders will never-EVER-be secure enough for the GOP. You could have a fence a la East Germany, double layered with a moat in the middle containing mines, sharks with laser beams attached to their heads and it still wouldn't be secure enough. Lest we have a shift to the center by the GOP, the fringe will keep on demanding for "secure" borders before any immigration reform. Hell most of us dont ask automatic citizenship or residency-Personally I would much rather see a streamlined process where people didn't have to wait up to 20 years for a freaking working permit or 10 years to re-unite with family, then there wouldn't be an illegal immigration problem anymore.
Well, we can make it more secure though. The border violence needs to end atleast in our soil. We need a better technology based infrastructure for the border security.

Well, stuff is done on paper still so part of the CIR is to eliminate backlog.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
DA User
View Public Profile
Find all posts by DA User
#18
01-06-2011, 01:03 PM
BANNED
Joined in Dec 2010
374 posts
theboys2010
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by DA User View Post
Well, it still has to go through Congress.
Nope if the supreme court says its law know one can change not the house or senate or president. This was about to happen with DADT that is why the congress went ahead and passed it because they wanted the military to institute the policy rather than the courts. Cause the courts ruling would make it effective immediately with the congress passing it they have time to implement and get people training on it before it happens. Supreme Court is the ruler of all.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
theboys2010
View Public Profile
Find all posts by theboys2010
#19
01-06-2011, 03:41 PM
BANNED
Joined in May 2009
6,763 posts
DA User
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by theboys2010 View Post
Nope if the supreme court says its law know one can change not the house or senate or president. This was about to happen with DADT that is why the congress went ahead and passed it because they wanted the military to institute the policy rather than the courts. Cause the courts ruling would make it effective immediately with the congress passing it they have time to implement and get people training on it before it happens. Supreme Court is the ruler of all.
Either by Congress or EO. How can the courts pass this?
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
DA User
View Public Profile
Find all posts by DA User
#20
01-07-2011, 01:24 AM
BANNED
Joined in Dec 2010
374 posts
theboys2010
0 AP
Quote:
Originally Posted by DA User View Post
Either by Congress or EO. How can the courts pass this?

If the Supreme court says its discriminatory and unconstitutional to not give citizenship to the dreamers because they are here of no fault of there own thats it. Go down to IRS and get your social security number that day.
  • Reply With Quote
Post your reply or quote more messages.
theboys2010
View Public Profile
Find all posts by theboys2010
  • ‹ previous
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • next ›


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Contact Us - DREAM Act Portal - Archive - Top
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.