Petitions Of Brothers, Sisters and Adult Children to be Eliminated

[X Factor 1,110]

Republicrats ~ demolicans , what's the difference?

[actob99 156]

Republicrats ~ demolicans , what's the difference?

They all suck &@$!!!!

[Boiler 43,548]

Amen

[Tahoma 2,291]

The "fact" is that a president can veto it. He signed it, therefor he owns it.

Apparently you missed the part where jhonster said it was "mostly Republicans." He was correct. Nice try though.

[spn1025 38]

Apparently you missed the part where jhonster said it was "mostly Republicans." He was correct. Nice try though.

And you missed my point that Clinton takes all responsibility for it.

[spn1025 38]

Apparently you missed the part where jhonster said it was "mostly Republicans." He was correct. Nice try though.

There's a process in the US government in which federal laws are created. Whatever passes the senate and the house, ultimately has to get signed by the president before it becomes law. The president has the option to veto. Before you start your victory dance, do a little research.

[Tahoma 2,291]

And you missed my point that Clinton takes all responsibility for it.

There's a process in the US government in which federal laws are created. Whatever passes the senate and the house, ultimately has to get signed by the president before it becomes law. The president has the option to veto. Before you start your victory dance, do a little research.

^^^ You can try to change the subject all you want, but it doesn't work with me. Your points still have nothing to do with the fact that Republicans were the majority supporter of those laws, just like jhonster said. You do understand what "majority" means, don't you?

[spn1025 38]

^^^ You can try to change the subject all you want, but it doesn't work with me. Your points still have nothing to do with the fact that Republicans were the majority supporter of those laws, just like jhonster said. You do understand what "majority" means, don't you?

I know what majority means, and I also know that the House means absolutely nothing. They're all corrupt lawyers, on both sides. There is one person in charge, one person who signs the bill in the end, and one person who makes the decision. There's nothing more to be said about it.

[Rahstyles 10]

This is definatly good.

YOu only need your spouse and your younger under 18 kid to immigrate anymore than that is ubsured

[Tahoma 2,291]

I know what majority means, and I also know that the House means absolutely nothing. They're all corrupt lawyers, on both sides. There is one person in charge, one person who signs the bill in the end, and one person who makes the decision. There's nothing more to be said about it.

You don't have any more to say about it because you've backed yourself into a corner and now you've reduced yourself to spouting nonsense. You're pretending that a bill can get to the President's desk without majority support from the House. Next, I suppose you will be telling us that a bill can land on the President's desk without majority support in the Senate.

You're also pretending that they are all lawyers. Of course, you didn't bother to find out if they were all lawyers because you were desperate to change the subject at any cost. Of course you are wrong about that too, but that's no surprise.

What is particularly funny about your twisted logic is that, in your earlier post, you were defending Republicans from the "big hate," yet now you are calling them all "corrupt lawyers"! Priceless!!!

[KHnTX 4]

Maybe a temporary suspension of siblings and older children and just not have any increase in skilled worker visas for two to four years so they can focus on what they already have would be better.

[Boiler 43,548]

Canada has suspended parents.

[rhein 451]

Politics on the forum, Talaga? We were a rich strong country when the Republicans were in charge!!

It's Bush Jr. who took down the economy. Did you miss that chapter? Jeez.

[actob99 156]

Have you left the house or read the paper lately????

[Tahoma 2,291]

Unfortunately you're too incompetent to understand the simple statement I made. I'll repeat it, and it doesn't get more simple than this. I said "regardless of how it came out of the house or senate, regardless of who supported it, the president is the deciding factor." I can try to break that down to 3rd grade logic for you, but you still probably wouldn't understand it.

I see you're still trying to ignore what you said and, instead, you're resorting to an ad hominem attack. Those are both signs of a failed argument. Of course, you still haven't explained how a President can be a "deciding factor" of whether a bill becomes law despite the fact that Congress is the deciding factor on whether a bill even ends up on the President's desk.

As painful as it is for you, a trip down memory lane is what you need:

Here's what Jhonster said.

...bought & paid for politicians (mostly Republicans)...

Here are your exact words where you mistakenly defended your beloved ("corrupt lawyer" ) Republican buddies with your "Why the big hate on Republicans?" question, pretending that they had nothing to do with the China trade agreement passing the House and the Senate. You do remember asking the question, don't you?

Why the big hate on Republicans since it was a Democrat (Clinton) who signed the current China trade agreement which allowed a huge chunk of our manufacturing jobs to go to China? Thanks Bill.

You asked the question and you got the answer: there is no "big hate on Republicans" because it's a simple fact that the deciding factor in the China trade bill and the NAFTA bill passing both houses of Congress was because of mostly Republican support.