Truely clueless.....its frightening...

Her job is to get money, they do that through fear. The idea that Bush wanted to export every illegal alien is retarded. That anybody is suggesting we "arrest them all" and send them all home, make it a "crime", etc. is flat inane. Can she show even one piece of legislation produced by any serious contender (not like Kucinich or some other insane legislator) that suggests that? Of course she can't. But scaring people into sending money is the job of the DNC Chair, if she gets people to donate their cash she's done her job. She doesn't set policy, she can't pick candidates, her only real job is to get people to send money, to do that she will do and say almost anything.
 
Damocles said:
Her job is to get money, they do that through fear. The idea that Bush wanted to export every illegal alien is retarded. That anybody is suggesting we "arrest them all" and send them all home, make it a "crime", etc. is flat inane. Can she show even one piece of legislation produced by any serious contender (not like Kucinich or some other insane legislator) that suggests that? Of course she can't. But scaring people into sending money is the job of the DNC Chair, if she gets people to donate their cash she's done her job. She doesn't set policy, she can't pick candidates, her only real job is to get people to send money, to do that she will do and say almost anything.
Click to expand...


Of course, in 2006, the last time the Republicans controlled the House, they passed a bill that made illegal presence in the United States a felony. There wasn't anything inaccurate about what she said.
 
David St. Hubbins said:
Of course, in 2006, the last time the Republicans controlled the House, they passed a bill that made illegal presence in the United States a felony. There wasn't anything inaccurate about what she said.
Click to expand...

Other than the "drive" to "arrest them all and send them back" it could almost be considered accurate. It is hyperbole based on something that didn't, and they knew wouldn't, ever become law. It is again, hyperbole aimed at scaring people into sending money. Tell me, where is the Eisenhower style "round them up and send them all home" portion of the legislation? And again, can you point to one serious legislator that suggests passing anything that "rounds them all up and sends them back"? If you can't, what she is doing is exactly what I stated she is doing. She mixes a portion of truth into an exaggeration so people can suggest it is all "accurate", but it really isn't, it is cynical fear mongering nonsense.
 
Damocles said:
Other than the "drive" to "arrest them all and send them back" it could almost be considered accurate. It is hyperbole based on something that didn't, and they knew wouldn't, ever become law. It is again, hyperbole aimed at scaring people into sending money. Tell me, where is the Eisenhower style "round them up and send them all home" portion of the legislation? And again, can you point to one serious legislator that suggests passing anything that "rounds them all up and sends them back"? If you can't, what she is doing is exactly what I stated she is doing.
Click to expand...


I already did that. Go check out the legislation the House Republicans passed in 2006. And you can ask your buddy Tom Tancredo about it if you want. I think he was in the House at that time.
 
David St. Hubbins said:
I already did that. Go check out the legislation the House Republicans passed in 2006. And you can ask your buddy Tom Tancredo about it if you want. I think he was in the House at that time.
Click to expand...

You mean 2005, the one that made employers check for verification before hiring and attempted to increase the penalty for illegal entry. I know the legislation, there is zero in it about running them all down and sending them all home, that is utter hyperbolic nonsense. When it was passed we held conversations about the fact that it would never become law, and how Bush was utterly against the legislation. The reality is, there was nothing in it about running all these people down and sending them home, it's an utter falsehood.
 
Damocles said:
You mean 2005, the one that made employers check for verification before hiring and attempted to increase the penalty for illegal entry. I know the legislation, there is zero in it about running them all down and sending them all home, that is utter hyperbolic nonsense. When it was passed we held conversations about the fact that it would never become law, and how Bush was utterly against the legislation. The reality is, there was nothing in it about running all these people down and sending them home, it's an utter falsehood.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was 2005. I was off by 16 days or so. Sue me. But your description isn't accurate. You seemingly forgot the part that turned every unlawful alien into a felon overnight and you seem not to understand the impact of that. You may not like what Ms. Wasserman Schultz has to say about the bill, but her statement is accurate, whether you agree with it or not.

And I don't give a shit whether the bill had a chance of becoming law.
 
David St. Hubbins said:
Yeah, it was 2005. I was off by 16 days or so. Sue me. But your description isn't accurate. You seemingly forgot the part that turned every unlawful alien into a felon overnight and you seem not to understand the impact of that. You may not like what Ms. Wasserman Schultz has to say about the bill, but her statement is accurate, whether you agree with it or not.

And I don't give a shit whether the bill had a chance of becoming law.
Click to expand...

I didn't, I mentioned that they sought to increase the penalty for illegal entry. But I accurately mentioned that there was zero provision in there for the "hunting them down and sending them home" portion. It's flat incorrect, inaccurate and hyperbolic fear mongering to suggest it is there. The legislation absolutely does not do what she said is "their goal"...

It isn't, it didn't, and if you are using that legislation to support her hyperbolic fear mongering it is solely because you are in agreement that the "unwashed masses" need to be scared into supporting your party.

And again, can you bring up even one serious legislator supporting any legislation to "round them up"? Please point them out. I'd like to see that.
 
Damocles said:
I didn't, I mentioned that they sought to increase the penalty for illegal entry. But I accurately mentioned that there was zero provision in there for the "hunting them down and sending them home" portion. It's flat incorrect, inaccurate and hyperbolic fear mongering to suggest it is there. The legislation absolutely does not do what she said is "their goal"...
Click to expand...

It isn't, it didn't, and if you are using that legislation to support her hyperbolic fear mongering it is solely because you are in agreement that the "unwashed masses" need to be scared into supporting your party.[/quote]

You keep misquoting her. She accurately described the legislation and its potential impact concerning making unlawful presence (not entry, as you have said) a felony.

Damocles said:
And again, can you bring up even one serious legislator supporting any legislation to "round them up"? Please point them out. I'd like to see that.
Click to expand...

You mean other than every legislator that voted for this bill?
 
David St. Hubbins said:
You keep misquoting her. She accurately described the legislation and its potential impact concerning making unlawful presence (not entry, as you have said) a felony.



You mean other than every legislator that voted for this bill?
Click to expand...

So you are supporting the hyperbole. And no, I am not "inaccurately quoting her". She flat states that it is "their solution" to "pack them all up and send them all home". It's total garbage, fear mongering BS a cynical attempt to scare people into sending money.

There are zero legislators currently suggesting we should round up anybody in some pogrom. It's flat utter BS. None of the legislators that voted for that bill suggested we start a "pack them up" program. Nothing in the legislation called for it.
 
"Hunting them down?"

Tell me, what is the purpose of making unlawful presence (not entry) a felony if not for massive deportation. To let unalwful aliens present in the United States to continue living here without fear of deportation or imprisonment? Get your head out of your ass, Damo.
 
David St. Hubbins said:
"Hunting them down?"

Tell me, what is the purpose of making unlawful presence (not entry) a felony if not for massive deportation. To let unalwful aliens present in the United States to continue living here without fear of deportation or imprisonment? Get your head out of your ass, Damo.
Click to expand...

It sought to make re-entry jailable when people were sent back. Basically, if you were caught and returned, since it was then for a "felony" re-entry would then be jailable.

Can you tell me what portion of that started a program of "hunting them down" or "packing them up"? Point out the wording. Tell me how was the pogrom to begin according to the legislation, because no matter how many times I read it, it isn't there. Was it the part that made employers actually check? Was that the "rounding up" portion? (sorry the "packing them up" portion)?

Do you in fact actually understand what I am asking?

No matter how much you try to spin what she said, it absolutely was hyperbolic BS that exaggerated the effect of legislation that they knew would never become law. It simply didn't do what she said it did in regard to the "packing them up" portion of "their plan".
 
Oh, and can you explain how she seems entirely clueless as to how the fifth amendment might apply?

Tell me, can you be tried for breaking a law that didn't exist when you "broke it"? Can they go back in time, and try you for doing something that they later made a law about?

The legislation could not make "felons" out of people who entered before the law passed, we have protections against stuff like that.
 
Damocles said:
Oh, and can you explain how she seems entirely clueless as to how the fifth amendment might apply? Tell me, can you be tried for breaking a law that didn't exist when you "broke it"? Can they go back in time, and try you for doing something that they later made a law about? The legislation could not make "felons" out of people who entered before the law passed, we have protections against stuff like that.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that non-citizens have constitutional rights, Dalai Damocles?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top