50 Million Dollar Resort For Illegals

I agree Davey,

by the same token though, who do I believe when they give there "elect me" speaches:( I know you are talking about NOT re-electing those that don't keep their promises. Does that ever happen? LOL! Ok, well, the scariest part for me is how the votes turn out. I think I am right to believe what I do, but the majority has been voting against what I believe. So am I wrong, or are the wrong people our leaders. I mean show me, and I am not afraid to admit I am wrong, change my vote whatever. But I don't see it, hell, I don't even see anyone I want to vote for anymore, because like I said, I don't trust any of them. I wonder how many don't vote at all because they'd rather have no crackers than stale ones:(
 

Nwlady,
Good posts there,

One of the biggest reasons and total disappointment why this country is going downhill is very easy to figure out.
Point your finger towards Washington,D.C. and every elected official that works there including the President.
Ive lived in this country long enough to watch all politicians at work doing what they think is best for this country.
So far,IMO,they have done very little if anything to get this county moving again but on the other hand the voters have to share this blame too by reelecting those do-nothing members of Congress over and over again.

OK Ill get off the speakers box now,I said my piece.



they are the true American terrorists
 
Nwlady,
Good posts there,

One of the biggest reasons and total disappointment why this country is going downhill is very easy to figure out.
Point your finger towards Washington,D.C. and every elected official that works there including the President.
Ive lived in this country long enough to watch all politicians at work doing what they think is best for this country.
So far,IMO,they have done very little if anything to get this county moving again but on the other hand the voters have to share this blame too by reelecting those do-nothing members of Congress over and over again.

OK Ill get off the speakers box now,I said my piece.


I agree, Davey. We need to quit voting in the same career politicians, who follow their own agenda's instead of working for the people who elected them. Both parties are guilty and we the people deserve much more. I'm really looking forward to the 2014 election, and hopefully we will elect those who will work for what's best for our country instead of their own political interests
 

I agree, Davey. We need to quit voting in the same career politicians, who follow their own agenda's instead of working for the people who elected them. Both parties are guilty and we the people deserve much more. I'm really looking forward to the 2014 election, and hopefully we will elect those who will work for what's best for our country instead of their own political interests

I hope so Misty, it seems kind of hopeless, I was one of those silly kids that was taught good always overcomes bad. One thing I have to bring up is the lack of attention to the billions of abortions that are still being allowed, what about people not being able to choose naturopaths for their primary docs if they want to? Seems that unless you've lived some of these issues, how can someone that hasn't make wise choices on Capital Hill? Money rules, or vote for the guy/gal that looks like me, or comes from the biggest family (ancestors). We need a Mr. Smith (James Stewart's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington) I know, I'm such a dreamer;)
 
I hope so Misty, it seems kind of hopeless, I was one of those silly kids that was taught good always overcomes bad. One thing I have to bring up is the lack of attention to the billions of abortions that are still being allowed, what about people not being able to choose naturopaths for their primary docs if they want to? Seems that unless you've lived some of these issues, how can someone that hasn't make wise choices on Capital Hill? Money rules, or vote for the guy/gal that looks like me, or comes from the biggest family (ancestors). We need a Mr. Smith (James Stewart's "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington) I know, I'm such a dreamer;)

Recently read there is a greater divide among people than 4 years ago, and hopefully that divide will get the voters to the polls. People are really getting angry and beginning to let their voices be heard, and seen, and those politicians ignoring the majority of voters demands, are backing down. It would be good to see majority rule back again. Still don't understand how the majority of people can be overruled by for instance 1 person, in many situations. Hopefully all the overblown political correctness will go away too.

i'm with you about abortions, Denise, and Obama voted four times against legislation to protect and care for infants accidentally born alive during late-term abortions....the newborns are left to die.
 
OMG, don't even get me started on partial birth abortions. Talk about horrific, and talk about putting a childs life in danger, geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez, don't get me started.

But yeah, It seems to me that to stay in their jobs, politicians have to stay with whatever keeps their job. Now how can I fault that when I have to kiss butt on every, job I've ever done. You stand up for the unpopular vote, and you six feet under, as SB mentioned. You go with the flow or you're out. Hell, at this point I could even feel sorry for O'bama, he needs his paycheck right?
 
To all the above people complaining about how bad they've got it & how we should turn our backs on the rest of the world, I ask... how many meals have any of you missed? How many nights have you gone to bed hungry because you couldn't afford food due to it being given to foreigners & their children? When was the last time you spent the night sleeping outside on the sidewalk or underneath a bush on the side of a building because you have no money for a roof over your head due to your job being taken away by a foreigner?

The truth of the matter is that none of you have experienced any of that.

You are all members of one of the most comfortable, well-fed societies in the world & in it's entire history. The number of homeless people in this country is a miniscule percentage of our total population & many of them are homeless either of their own choosing or due to some mental illness, alcoholism or drug addiction that prevents them from leading a normal life.

And re: the question "...how can we help others if we are not taking care of ourselves?"... aside from a decent, affordable health care system which Obama has tried to fix & gotten nothing but resistance on, we ARE taking care of ourselves. Every senior citizen is entitled to a reasonably & in many cases, overly generous monthly Social Security check. Our poor & needy get food & shelter assistance.

Hell, the same people complaining that we "aren't taking care of our own" because we're giving too much to foreigners, are the same ones who are complaining that we're giving too much to needy Americans right here at home. Make up your minds!!!!

Face it... you all really just don't like the idea of the govt giving anybody anything.

The problem is not that the govt gives too much money away to foreigners, the problem is that too many Americans have gotten themselves mired in so much personal debt, when tough times come along, they're stuck with so many bills for things they've bought but didn't necessarily need, that they cry & complain that it's all the fault of foreigners & welfare recipients.

It amazes me that there are people who would be willing to sit & listen to reports of human suffering on the news every night & just think to themselves "too bad for them, just don't send any of our tax dollars there to help them".

And as for the comments about the US debt, most of that "debt" is not owed to foreign countries like China. Most of that debt is owed to Americans citizens right here in this country in the form of pensions, Social Security etc.


6a00d83451c0c869e2014e8a833793970d-pi



Blaming foreigners for every little perceived imperfection in life has always been the favorite tactic of nationalists & xenophobes. America cannot shut it's doors & turn into an isolationist country, hell bent on taking care of only it's own. If we did that, we'd give up any influence we have in other regions of the world, & believe you me, countries like Russia & China would happily step in to fill the void. And you can bet that the economic & trade agreements they entered into with all these countries we abandoned in the name of taking care of numero uno, would not be beneficial to us at all.

This seems like the old clean your plate don't you know there are starving kids in China. True there's a lot we have not experienced but recognize with things like foreign aid and personal charity. People give what they can when they can. Every body can't experience every thing good or bad. And many here have had to sacrifice. Just because some ONE has does NOT mean EVERYone should have it. What's mine is not yours-it would be nice if I share but not necessarily practical, legal or ethical. There's a reason a life guard throws you a life preserver or pole before they jump in and attempt a rescue.

Some countries are in the early stages of development-there's no way around it. But being poor does not justify gangster crime, smuggling, prostitution or illegal entry into other countries. It doesn't take money to be honest, hard working or to have the focus to push one's self through hard times and conditions.


But overly generous social security checks-really???? Which most paid for. I'll be the first to admit in capitalist country too many American can't manage their own finances or fail to learn and understand economic theory. But overly generous social security checks??? I'm living in a neighborhood where those "overly generous social security checks" can't keep up with the over sized local tax increases to pay for massive public school expansion in part due to inner city boundary hoppers partially fueled by illegal immigrant students. Until the end of 90s they had to pull the seniors on social security out of their house on a gurney. Today in the same neighborhood you have quadruple the number people letting their house go into tax foreclosure. And with all the unoccupied homes the local schools still have an increasing student population which theoretically would mean some homes are sending 5-10 kids to school. The tax burden is worse than carrying a mortgage in some cases.
 
... and Obama voted four times against legislation to protect and care for infants accidentally born alive during late-term abortions....the newborns are left to die.

Good to see both sides of the story, regardless of which party you favor...

Gingrich has echoed this claim in recent days, saying Obama is “the most extreme, pro-abortion president in U.S. history” and that he voted in favor of killing unborn children.

That bill, which Obama did vote against, would have required doctors to resuscitate an aborted fetus if legislators felt it had any chance of viability. But Obama’s reasoning for voting against the bill was nothing like how Gingrich and Huckabee represent it.

In interviews with a range of media outlets, Obama expressed that he feared the bill would undermine Roe v Wade by defining any fetus as a human with human rights and claimed it could be used to take down any abortion rights legislation that anti-choice activists didn’t like.

Obama was, however, “fully in support” of a federal bill that provided the same protection viable fetuses while also including protections for Roe v Wade :

"OBAMA: I have said repeatedly that I would have been completely in, fully in support of the federal bill that everybody supported – which was to say – that you should provide assistance to any infant that was born – even if it was as a consequence of an induced abortion.

That was not the bill that was presented at the state level. What that bill also was doing was trying to undermine Roe vs. Wade."

Obama also felt that the legislation would have taken decision-making out of the hands of doctors, giving anti-abortion activists an opening to sue abortion providers by alleging that they chose to terminate the life of a viable fetus on purpose.

He did not, however, express any support for “infanticide” or for ending the life of a viable fetus, as Huckabee and Gingrich claim.
http://thinkprogress.org/election/2012/08/27/747511/gingrich-huckabee-obama-abortion/


"Obama: Well and because they have not been telling the truth. And I hate to say that people are lying, but here's a situation where folks are lying. I have said repeatedly that I would have been completely in, fully in support of the federal bill that everybody supported - which was to say --that you should provide assistance to any infant that was born - even if it was as a consequence of an induced abortion.

That was not the bill that was presented at the state level. What that bill also was doing was trying to undermine Roe vs. Wade. By the way, we also had a bill, a law already in place in Illinois that insured life saving treatment was given to infants.

So for people to suggest that I and the Illinois medical society, so Illinois doctors were somehow in favor of withholding life saving support from an infant born alive is ridiculous.

It defies commonsense and it defies imagination and for people to keep on pushing this is offensive and it's an example of the kind of politics that we have to get beyond.

It's one thing for people to disagree with me about the issue of choice, it's another thing for people to out and out misrepresent my positions repeatedly, even after they know that they're wrong. And that's what's been happening."
 
This seems like the old clean your plate don't you know there are starving kids in China. True there's a lot we have not experienced but recognize with things like foreign aid and personal charity. People give what they can when they can. Every body can't experience every thing good or bad. And many here have had to sacrifice. Just because some ONE has does NOT mean EVERYone should have it. What's mine is not yours-it would be nice if I share but not necessarily practical, legal or ethical. There's a reason a life guard throws you a life preserver or pole before they jump in and attempt a rescue.

Some countries are in the early stages of development-there's no way around it. But being poor does not justify gangster crime, smuggling, prostitution or illegal entry into other countries. It doesn't take money to be honest, hard working or to have the focus to push one's self through hard times and conditions.


But overly generous social security checks-really???? Which most paid for. I'll be the first to admit in capitalist country too many American can't manage their own finances or fail to learn and understand economic theory. But overly generous social security checks??? I'm living in a neighborhood where those "overly generous social security checks" can't keep up with the over sized local tax increases to pay for massive public school expansion in part due to inner city boundary hoppers partially fueled by illegal immigrant students. Until the end of 90s they had to pull the seniors on social security out of their house on a gurney. Today in the same neighborhood you have quadruple the number people letting their house go into tax foreclosure. And with all the unoccupied homes the local schools still have an increasing student population which theoretically would mean some homes are sending 5-10 kids to school. The tax burden is worse than carrying a mortgage in some cases.

Isn't where people all are only allowed to have the same amount, same belongings, same amount of money in the bank called communism? I think it is, but I better google it.

Your post brought to mind about just because America, or anyone has a lot, that they have to give it all to their neighbor, enough so the neighbor has the same stuff. I don't believe in that, and I don't want what others have just because they have more than I do.
 
http://relevantmagazine.com/life_article.php?id=7591
Strang: Based on emails we received, another issue of deep importance to our readers is a candidate’s stance on abortion. We largely know your platform, but there seems to be some real confusion about your position on third-trimester and partial-birth abortions. Can you clarify your stance for us?

Obama: I absolutely can, so please don’t believe the emails. I have repeatedly said that I think it’s entirely appropriate for states to restrict or even prohibit late-term abortions as long as there is a strict, well-defined exception for the health of the mother. Now, I don’t think that “mental distress” qualifies as the health of the mother. I think it has to be a serious physical issue that arises in pregnancy, where there are real, significant problems to the mother carrying that child to term. Otherwise, as long as there is such a medical exception in place, I think we can prohibit late-term abortions.

The other email rumor that’s been floating around is that somehow I’m unwilling to see doctors offer life-saving care to children who were born as a result of an induced abortion. That’s just false. There was a bill that came up in Illinois that was called the “Born Alive” bill that purported to require life-saving treatment to such infants. And I did vote against that bill. The reason was that there was already a law in place in Illinois that said that you always have to supply life-saving treatment to any infant under any circumstances, and this bill actually was designed to overturn Roe v. Wade, so I didn’t think it was going to pass constitutional muster.

Ever since that time, emails have been sent out suggesting that, somehow, I would be in favor of letting an infant die in a hospital because of this particular vote. That’s not a fair characterization, and that’s not an honest characterization. It defies common sense to think that a hospital wouldn't provide life-saving treatment to an infant that was alive and had a chance of survival.

Strang: You’ve said you’re personally against abortion and would like to see a reduction in the number of abortions under your administration. So, as president, how would do you propose accomplishing that?

Obama: I think we know that abortions rise when unwanted pregnancies rise. So, if we are continuing what has been a promising trend in the reduction of teen pregnancies, through education and abstinence education giving good information to teenagers. That is important—emphasizing the sacredness of sexual behavior to our children. I think that’s something that we can encourage. I think encouraging adoptions in a significant way. I think the proper role of government. So there are ways that we can make a difference, and those are going to be things I focus on when I am president.

 
According to factcheck.org:

Obama opposed the 2001 and 2002 "born alive" bills as backdoor attacks on a woman's legal right to abortion, but he says he would have been "fully in support" of a similar federal bill that President Bush had signed in 2002, because it contained protections for Roe v. Wade.


We find that, as the NRLC said in a recent statement, Obama voted in committee against the 2003 state bill that was nearly identical to the federal act he says he would have supported. Both contained identical clauses saying that nothing in the bills could be construed to affect legal rights of an unborn fetus, according to an undisputed summary written immediately after the committee's 2003 mark-up session.
 
Thanks SeaBreeze and Jackie for your articles showing another side. :) it really adds to the discussion. I may not always agree, but I do respect your opinions.
 
Thanks SeaBreeze and Jackie for your articles showing another side. :) it really adds to the discussion. I may not always agree, but I do respect your opinions.

Right back atcha Misty, I respect your opinions too. :coolthumb:
 
I'm awake now and have just caught up with this discussion. Well done everyone on the excellent tone.
I'm happy to keep reading because it is very informative but I have nothing to add.

Except this side note:

NWLady said:
Isn't where people all are only allowed to have the same amount, same belongings, same amount of money in the bank called communism? I think it is, but I better google it.

I think the definition of pure communism is "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."In some ways that is also a plank of Christianity, Judaism and Islam but with God as part of the equation..


The trouble is that neither the communists nor the religious communities have lived by this principle. They have tried but failed. Today, with a world run by economists, there's not even much lip service paid.
 
The Washington Post
House Republicans unveil plan to deal with border crisis
By Ed O'Keefe and Robert Costa July 23 at 7:48 PM

A House Republican plan to address the influx of illegal immigrants at the U.S.-Mexico border would cost considerably less than President Obama has requested but could get upended by the political forces that long have divided GOP lawmakers.

The $1.5 billion proposal unveiled Wednesday proposes to spend far less than Obama’s
$3.7 billion request to provide more resources along the southern border and to care for the record number of migrants who have arrived in recent months. It would mandate the deployment of National Guard troops, boost funding for Border Patrol, and require the administration to more quickly process and deport young children and families who have illegally entered the country.


But it was unclear how rapidly the House could advance the proposal and whether House Republicans will be able to reach agreement with Senate Democrats on a final deal before Congress adjourns Aug. 1 for a five-week recess.


“I’d like to act. We’ve got a humanitarian crisis on the border that has to be dealt with,” House Speaker John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) told reporters Wednesday. But Boehner also faulted Obama for failing to work with Congress to swiftly seek a solution.


“The administration ought to get their act together,” he said. Later, Boehner’s office sent a letter to the White House asking for clarification on whether it supports changing a 2008 *anti-trafficking law to make it easier to deport minors from Central America.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...34b762-1280-11e4-8936-26932bcfd6ed_story.html
 
To Ease Crisis, U.S. May Vet Young Refugees Inside Honduras

By FRANCES ROBLES and MICHAEL D. SHEARJULY 24, 2014


Photo
25HONDURAS-master675.jpg


Migrants traveling north through Mexico toward the United States on a northbound freight train known as “The Beast,” because of rampant accidents and violent crime. Credit Meridith Kohut for The New York Times

Hoping to stem the recent surge of migrants at the Southwest border, the Obama administration is considering whether to allow hundreds of minors and young adults from Honduras into the United States without making the dangerous trek through Mexico, according to a draft of the proposal.

If approved, the plan would direct the government to screen thousands of children and youths in Honduras to see if they can enter the United States as refugees or on emergency humanitarian grounds. It would be the first American refugee effort in a nation reachable by land to the United States, the White House said, putting the violence in Honduras on the level of humanitarian emergencies in Haiti and Vietnam, where such programs have been conducted in the past amid war and major crises.

Critics of the plan were quick to pounce, saying it appeared to redefine the legal definition of a refugee and would only increase the flow of migration to the United States.

Now President Obama is thinking about going to Honduras to get immigrants to come to the U.S, to save them the hardship to get here on their own.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/w...ing-of-youths-seeking-entry-to-honduras-.html
 
As the article states, the White House has said this is the least likely option they will take, in the meantime, Republicans refuse to do anything on Immigration Reform.
 
As the article states, the White House has said this is the least likely option they will take, in the meantime, Republicans refuse to do anything on Immigration Reform.

So far, Jackie...there are 3 Immigration reform proposals. One is a 3.7 billion proposal by Pres. Obama , a 2.7 billion proposal by the Democrats and a 1.5 billion by the Republicans, which I posted. The Republican proposal includes that the 2008 immigration bill be changed so illegal immigrants can be returned to their home countries sooner. The Democrat and Pres. Obama proposals do not want the 2008 bill changed.

There are 2 weeks left to resolve the issue before congressmen and women leave on their August break.
 
The Republicans can draft all the proposals they want to, but when they refuse to take action on them, what's the point? Other than political grandstanding.

"Oh yeah, we've got a proposal of our own!!!! (We're just not going to schedule a vote on it any time soon...)"

Really? House GOP Whines About Border Crisis While Killing Its Own Immigration Reform PlanBy: Justin Baragona
Friday, July, 11th, 2014, 10:19 am


boehner-sad.jpg


You just cannot make any of this up.


Over the past few weeks, Republicans on Capitol Hill and conservative commentators have focused on the situation at the border where tens of thousands of migrant children are being detained. The children are refugees escaping from violent conditions in Central America. Per a law signed by President Bush in 2008, children from specific countries in Central America who reach the border must be allowed to seek asylum. Therefore, they need to be processed, and a determination needs to be made if they are eligible to remain in the country. Due to the influx of migrants from Central America, a bottleneck has been created, causing overcrowding in the detention center system which has led to this humanitarian crisis.


Republicans, meanwhile, have decided to use this particular crisis to rail against President Obama (natch). One criticism has been that the President lured these refugees to the border when he issued the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, a memo that provided DREAMers a temporary reprieve from deportation. This memo was meant as a stop-gap until permanent legislation was passed, as the DREAM Act was in Congressional purgatory at the time (and still is.) Conservatives have claimed that this action by POTUS has convinced those coming to the border that they will be granted citizenship once they arrive.


Another criticism leveled at the President from the right has been that he isn’t doing enough to secure our borders or stem the tide of illegal immigration. It doesn’t matter that these children are actually stopping at the border and being detained by border patrol agents. Or that that deportations are higher under President Obama than his predecessors. Or even that we have more border patrol agents and other border security measures than during President Bush’s tenure. It doesn’t really matter to the GOP. They continue to complain that POTUS isn’t doing anything.


Except, he is. President Obama has pushed for comprehensive immigration reform since first taking office. The bill finally passed the US Senate over one year ago with bipartisan support. That bill included increased border security measures, such as an increase in border patrol agents and more fencing along the Mexican border. However, the House Republicans have refused to act on it, with Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) not allowing it to come up for a vote. The House GOP said they would come up with their own alternative to present to the Senate. On Thursday, that all came to an end.


Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) was tasked with coming up with the House’s alternative immigration reform bill. During his tenure in the House, Diaz-Balart has made it a mission of his finally see sweeping changes made to the country’s immigration policy. He has worked with Rep. Luis Gutierrez (D-IL), along with others, to come up with at least a somewhat bipartisan solution. Diaz-Balart felt that progress had been made and that the policy his group had come up with easily pass in the House if brought up for a vote. Instead, he informed reporters on Thursday that Republican leadership had told him that immigration reform was officially dead in the House, and they wouldn’t be moving on it at all.


I’m really, really disappointed. We have a good bill. We have a unique opportunity to secure our borders, fix our broken immigration system, help our economy and do so in a way that adhere to the rule of law. But unfortunately I’ve been told we’re not going to be able to pursue it. And I think that’s highly unfortunate.”


The Florida Republican also told reporters that the main reason he was given by Boehner that they won’t move forward is because they can’t trust the President to enforce the laws. In essence, Boehner told Diaz-Balart that Congress won’t pass any laws while President Obama is in the White House.


I have no idea how Boehner thinks this is going to fly with the American people. It appears he has completely painted himself into a corner. On Thursday, Boehner threw a hissy fit when confronted with a question about passing the President’s emergency spending request regarding the crisis. He wanted to know, “When is the President going to take some responsibility for this.” In essence, he was telling the President to continue to use executive orders to deal with issues affecting the country. At the same time, Boehner is filing a lawsuit against the White House for the use of executive orders.


I have no idea what the endgame is for Republicans in Washington. The fact is, if House Republicans had passed comprehensive immigration reform over a year ago, there would already be more resources at the border to deal with this crisis. Instead, they have to wait until the President sends over an emergency spending measure during the height of a crisis, and then complain about him not doing anything to prevent this situation from occurring. They want him to act like a ‘leader’, yet refuse to work with him and sue him when he circumvents them in order to get something done.


They have no plans, only complaints. Everything is the President’s fault. They can’t trust him. Therefore, they refuse to work with him. Boehner will not allow any bill that comes from the Senate to pass the House. He is just going to sit in a corner, pout, and tell anyone that asks him that it is the President who isn’t doing anything. It is the President who is passing the buck. But the President is also doing too much, and we need to sue him.


It just makes your head spin.


http://www.politicususa.com/2014/07...r-crisis-killing-immigration-reform-plan.html

.
 
Boehner knew when he made the first statement that their proposal was dead in the water, the article said that the Republicans did not agree on it.......Boehner was doing nothing but playing games, coming out and saying they want to act...what a laugh...this has been going on for some time, now it is down to the wire and the below article just came out in the Washington Post with him stating there will likely be no immigration reform because they can't trust President Obama....give me a friggin break.

As to your comment that the President does not want the 2008 law changed, I've already posted links stating otherwise.

From the Washington Post........

A week after signaling that House Republicans would pursue an overhaul of immigration laws, Speaker John A. Boehner declared Thursday that his caucus is unlikely to move forward until President Obama gains their trust.

“There’s widespread doubt about whether this administration can be trusted to enforce our laws,” Boehner (R-Ohio) said during a midday news conference at the Capitol. “And it’s going to be difficult to move any immigration legislation until that changes.”
Boehner was making his first extended public remarks since releasing a list of GOP “standards” for immigration policy at a conference retreat last week. His attempt to place the burden on Obama illustrated the mounting opposition from hard-line conservatives and laid the groundwork for blaming the White House if a deal fails.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said this week that an immigration deal remains a long shot in a sharply divided Congress. Rep. Raúl R. Labrador (R-
Idaho) suggested that Boehner could lose his speakership if he pursues a bill in a midterm election year.

Aides emphasized that Boehner remains committed to immigration reform and said he raised concerns about Obama because they had emerged as a consensus during the retreat. But his remarks drew rebukes from advocacy groups frustrated by the verbal zigzags of a speaker who has spent 15 months calling immigration a top priority while refusing to bring any legislation to the House floor.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/boehner-immigration-reform-stalls-because-gop-has-widespread-doubt-about-obama/2014/02/06/233b497a-8f55-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html?hpid=z1
 


Back
Top