It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Rush Limbaugh : Agree to amnesty if it comes with no voting rights for 15-25 years. Any takers?

page: 1
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Limbaugh was talking on Fox News Sunday and came up with the idea that he would support an amnesty bill if it meant that illegal immigrants, who were given citizenship, could not vote for 15-25 years.

I think this is a great idea. It is humane, something all democrats will love, and removes the excuse from the Republicans that this is all about votes.

So what do people think? It's certainly one way to find out if the Democrats REALLY care and also if the Republicans are REALLY only concerned about this being a voting issue.

www.washingtonexaminer.com... 49418

Limbaugh seems to think that not a single Democrat would vote for it.
edit on 18/2/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 04:53 PM
link   
15 to 25 years is way too long in my opinion. What would the purpose be? Once they are citizens they should be able to vote.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 04:53 PM
link   
he's said this before.

problem is, even if the dems agree;
five minutes after implementation somebody is going to cry 'civil rights' and appeal to an idiot judge and the voting restriction part will be nullified.

no precedence so I don't see this happening.


+5 more 
posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Interesting, but why don't they just go the
legal route and apply for citizenship?


+1 more 
posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: burntheships
Interesting, but why don't they just go the
legal route and apply for citizenship?



For the same reason that it's too hard to get a photo ID to vote.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: ElGoobero
he's said this before.

problem is, even if the dems agree;
five minutes after implementation somebody is going to cry 'civil rights' and appeal to an idiot judge and the voting restriction part will be nullified.

no precedence so I don't see this happening.


That could be solved by creating a path that took 15-25 years before citizenship was granted, with a hold on any deportation unless a crime was committed.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: burntheships

Do you have any idea how hard it is to legally migrate from Mexico? There's a reason people do it illegally. Poor people have almost no chance unless they already have family here.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:02 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

15 to 25 year path? Now that's just ridiculous. What does an older person do? Just die waiting?



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: UKTruth

15 to 25 year path? Now that's just ridiculous. What does an older person do? Just die waiting?


They get to stay and work legally and come out of the shadows without fear of deportation.
The path to citizenship is long for legal immigration too.

This is the point Limbaugh is making - people who want amnesty don't care about illegal aliens, they care about votes, so removing the threat of deportation and allowing these people to live and work freely in the US is not their goal.

I think this is a great way to shine a light on the true motivations. It would be very revealing to the American people to see Democrats vote against a bill that protects illegals from deportation just because that protection didn't come with voting rights.

This would be a checkmate move against the Democrats.
edit on 18/2/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:06 PM
link   


So what do people think?


The left will never go for it.

They are enthralled with the idea of instant voters, and those illegal immigrants will be so grateful the left will have their votes locked for the next 50 years.

It's not about them, anyone thinks it is?

Delusional.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96



So what do people think?


The left will never go for it.

They are enthralled with the idea of instant voters, and those illegal immigrants will be so grateful the left will have their votes locked for the next 50 years.

It's not about them, anyone thinks it is?

Delusional.


I think you are right, which is what Limbaugh is really saying too, I believe.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ElGoobero
he's said this before.

problem is, even if the dems agree;
five minutes after implementation somebody is going to cry 'civil rights' and appeal to an idiot judge and the voting restriction part will be nullified.

no precedence so I don't see this happening.


That could be solved by creating a path that took 15-25 years before citizenship was granted, with a hold on any deportation unless a crime was committed.


How does that address the criminal immigrants that are already here that sanctuary cities and states protect? Aren't they all criminals???? Is that not aiding and abetting???? HELLO!!??

If implemented, we would grant amnesty to all or would there be a vetting process that would be considered racist by left leaning individuals?

The whole idea of "ideas" that sidestep preexisting laws and procedures is an unnecessary compromise to blatant law breakers.

Just do as the law prescribes either way and send them home. The only way to fix this problem is to reset and FOLLOW THE LAW.

Otherwise, our entire legal system loses credibility and the confidence of the people. Granted, our legal system is extremely jeopardized, but you gotta start somewhere or else it doesn't mean snip.

Shutdown sanctuary strongholds, arrest the perpetrators, round up the ILLEGALS, and send them back with an application packet and a box lunch.

edit on E28America/ChicagoSun, 18 Feb 2018 17:16:23 -06002pmSundayth05pm by EternalShadow because: add/correction



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth

It's sad that people's livelihood have come down to Republican/democrats bickering.

And yes i can see liberals just wanting votes.
However, there are a lot of people who want amnesty for themselves, their family. Having nothing to do with politics.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:17 PM
link   
Oh this outta be real good...




posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ElGoobero
he's said this before.

problem is, even if the dems agree;
five minutes after implementation somebody is going to cry 'civil rights' and appeal to an idiot judge and the voting restriction part will be nullified.

no precedence so I don't see this happening.


That could be solved by creating a path that took 15-25 years before citizenship was granted, with a hold on any deportation unless a crime was committed.


How does that address the criminal immigrants that are already here that sanctuary cities and states protect?

If implemented, we would grant amnesty to all or would there be a vetting process that would be considered racist by left leaning individuals?

The whole idea of "ideas" that sidestep preexisting laws and procedures is an unnecessary compromise to blatant law breakers.

Just do as the law prescribes either way and send them home. The only way to fix this problem is to reset and FOLLOW THE LAW.

Otherwise, our entire legal system loses credibility and the confidence of the people. Granted, our legal system is extremely jeopardized, but you gotta start somewhere or else it doesn't mean snip.

Shutdown sanctuary strongholds, arrest the perpetrators, round up the ILLEGALS, and send them back with an application packet and a box lunch.


All of that could be addressed in such a bill.

End of Sanctuary cities - what is the need if there were no deportations
Refuse program to criminals
Insist on also fixing the inflow of illegal aliens - border security, no chain migration, end to visa lottery, e-verify...

If the President literally went all in with 15-20m paths to citizenship, with a 15-25yr time period and NO deportations for law-abiding illegals in exchange for ALL his other demands, and threw the ball into the Democrats court, what could they do?
edit on 18/2/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: UKTruth

It's sad that people's livelihood have come down to Republican/democrats bickering.

And yes i can see liberals just wanting votes.
However, there are a lot of people who want amnesty for themselves, their family. Having nothing to do with politics.


Amnesty is just a word. What law-abiding illegals want, I would guess, is the removal of the fear of deportation, to be able to work freely without fear of being caught, and a future as American citizens for themselves and their kids and grandkids.
edit on 18/2/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:27 PM
link   
My thought's are why isn't this fat POS child molester in prison for the crimes he commits on his sexual holidays in the Dominican Republic while he's jacked up on viagra.

K~



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ursushorribilis
a reply to: UKTruth

It's sad that people's livelihood have come down to Republican/democrats bickering.

And yes i can see liberals just wanting votes.
However, there are a lot of people who want amnesty for themselves, their family. Having nothing to do with politics.


All right, I can see two ways to get it:

1. Apply and go through the legal channels like most other immigrants who come here legally do. Then, you are eligible to be a full citizen in seven years.

2. Take the amnesty deal, skip the "hard" process, but forego the rights of full citizenship (that's too hard, right?) for the 15 to 25 year time period because you felt you were either too special, didn't care, or didn't really want to worry about it.



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: aethertek
My thought's are why isn't this fat POS child molester in prison for the crimes he commits on his sexual holidays in the Dominican Republic while he's jacked up on viagra.

K~


For the same reason Clinton isn't?



posted on Feb, 18 2018 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

You obviously have no idea about the process of migrating legally.




top topics



 
18
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join