1. Grasscity.com August contest: Subscribe to our channel on YouTube to be entered to win a PAX 2 Vaporizer! Winner will be announced Sept 1st
    Dismiss Notice

House passes DREAM ACT..........

Discussion in 'Politics' started by QP3, Dec 9, 2010.

  1. Why do democrats pick fucking names like "dream act" or " pro-choice" instead of calling shit what it really is......... oh because it wouldnt be so popular otherwise. Senate will probably shit on it though, but wtf america?

    House passes Dream Act immigration bill | Reuters
  2. Meh, might as well give the immigrants that are already here amnesty and stop wasting our tax-payers money on finding em.

    Decent legislation, but definitely not named appropriate haha, talk about trying to sell votes.

  3. despite being an enumerated power, i dont think congress has any business regulating naturalization. why should the federal govt have the authority to tell me who i can and cannot have as a visitor in my own home? or hire in my company?

    i say end the welfare state, end the warfare state, and open the borders.

    that being said, we haven't yet ended the welfare state and this amnesty bill is gonna cost the american taxpayer bigtimeeeeeeeee

  4. Because finding them is so much more exspensive then paying for them to survive the next 75 years. I just dont agree with that statement at all( ur bolded text). Almost all of them are un-skilled laborers.

  5. THINK about that bro. What if your friend was Osama bin laden????
  6. yeah, and what if he's not?
  7. #7 QP3, Dec 9, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 9, 2010

    Great concept. Should we all just promise to not harbor terrorist, and then leave it at that?

  8. you have the right to be safe from unreasonable bullshit searches, and it's protected in the bill of rights. the feds can't kick down your door because 'what if my friend is osama?'

    and my friend is innocent until proven guilty, ya dig?
  9. terrorists are guiltly, it doesnt need to be proven, they just are, otherwise they wouldnt be terrorists
  10. #10 QP3, Dec 9, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 9, 2010

    What you are saying is a right that Americans already enjoy. We do have the right to be safe from bla bla bla bla bla, because that is in our set of rights as citizens of United States of America.

    Anyway what you said oringally was that the Feds shouldnt have the right to regulate who we have in our homes. I said of course they do, because no one is able to harbor certain people , even citizens at times ,ie felony warrants or something staying at your house, aiding and abiding or someshit. Your neighbors have the right to be safe from the murder felony guy staying in your house or an illegal alien that was in a gang before he jumped ship to usa.
  11. I just do not agree with your statement at all.

  12. dude the rights are endowed by the creator, not by any politician or government.

    and governments don't have rights. they have authorities. i said that i didn't think the federal government should have the authority to regulate who i have in house. tough shit for me though, they were given the power to rule on such matters under as naturalization in article i section 8 + the 14th amendment. alls i'm sayin is i disagree with that shit. same as i disagree with the the post office.

    i think the feds need to adhere to the 10th amendment and defer more often to the states or we the people. the only federal crimes i see in the constitution that would be under direct jurisdiction of the feds are treason, piracy, counterfeiting
  13. I'm sure they can already get a free education under some law, act or financial aid which we the taxpayers get to pay even more for anyways:hello: WHAT ELSE IS NEW?
  14. Frankly, this is one of the few things Democrats have done right in the past few years. If you want to solve the illegal immigration problem, this is one of the steps towards doing so.
  15. I think this is a step in the right direction. My parents brought me to the US when I was 4, we stayed, my visa expired, and I Lived as an illegal immigrant till i got married at 23. People in my situation might not legally be American, but if you were to send me back to where I came from they wouldn't look at me there as one of their own anymore. I can't even speak my native language correctly. If the dream act was around when i was younger I would have signed up for the military if it meant I could get my papers. Thanks god the US was still handing out SSN to all immigrants back when I came over.
  16. So until you were 23 you, like, beheaded people in the desert and stuff?
  17. I don't know how I feel about this.
  18. How do you justify wanting to limit anyone's ability to become a citizen of the US? Why shouldn't people be allowed to work and live legally in the US regardless of where they are from, or where they were born, or how many marketable skills they have?

    Are you feeling a bit entitled today QP3? By that I mean entitled to the opportunity that your country America has provided you with. Why should others be restricted from this opportunity because of fake ass lines drawn on a map?

    Because we can't afford to give them all the same social services? That's true, but that just means we need to do away with the services, not restrict people from becoming citizens.
  19. Out of curiosity, what would you rather call pro-choice? haha I get the Dream act, but Pro-choice...

    Being pro-choice isn't the same as pro-abortion. Pro-choice means that they are in favor of women having a choice (as implied by the title) A lot of people who are pro-choice are that because they don't think the government should tell them what to do with their bodies/lives, but wouldn't have an abortion themselves. Ya dig?

Share This Page