Marco Rubio: 'I'd Come Here Illegally'

Superfreak said:
I stated they are either taking jobs, which otherwise would go to US citizens or they are living off the taxpayers. I suppose a third possibility is they are living off of criminal means. Kind of has to be one of those three.

You are in Alaska, so probably don't see too much of it up there, but if you were here, you could ask any construction worker if there is a fight with illegal immigrants for jobs around here.

http://www.politifact.com/florida/s...ck-scott-says-illegal-immigrants-taking-jobs/

Is a decent take on it.
Click to expand...

Seems to me that it is a mixed bag, SF.
 
annata said:
Good for Rubio, acknowledging why "illegals " ( hate that term - i use "undocumented") might want to come here.
He's actually sane, the problem is he's tied to a party that is not.
Click to expand...

no one actually blames the illegal aliens for wanting​ to come here.
 
Bijou said:
Well, he has 100% control over that, now doesn't he? Why on earth does he stay in the party that demonizes the very people in situations in which he now says he'd do the exact same thing?

Astonishing.
Click to expand...

because there is more than one issue in this world. it's possible to disagree with one belief while agreeing on ten others. you may not be familiar with that though, it's characteristic of someone that isn't a complete parrot ;)
 
G R I N D said:
because there is more than one issue in this world. it's possible to disagree with one belief while agreeing on ten others. you may not be familiar with that though, it's characteristic of someone that isn't a complete parrot ;)
Click to expand...

You have that backwards, actually. Only a complete parrot can accept what goes completely against the grain of one's personal scruples, in the guise of party loyalty and unity.
 
Bijou said:
You have that backwards, actually. Only a complete parrot can accept what goes completely against the grain of one's personal scruples, in the guise of party loyalty and unity.
Click to expand...

I don't know what to tell you. If I agreed on 9 issues with someone and disagreed on 1, I would look at that as a net-gain as far as a working relationship is concerned. You are seldom going to get people to sync up more than that. I think you are being unrealistic.
 
G R I N D said:
I don't know what to tell you. If I agreed on 9 issues with someone and disagreed on 1, I would look at that as a net-gain as far as a working relationship is concerned. You are seldom going to get people to sync up more than that. I think you are being unrealistic.
Click to expand...

It depends on what the one issue that you don't agree on happens to be. If it's something subjectively monumental, it's a deal breaker. That isn't a liberal trait; it's a human one.
 
G R I N D said:
that's why I used the term illegal even more.
Click to expand...
"Illegal entry" would be fine, "Illegal aliens" goes to the person, not the action.
But we're chewing on the same bone - you can use the term, i prefer to focus on the behavior/act, not personalize it. Small point.
 
welp in summation, those that are in complete lockstep with someone else is not a parrot, and those that work together on their common goals in spite of a disagreement in another area is a parrot. good to live in bijou's world.
 
G R I N D said:
welp in summation, those that are in complete lockstep with someone else is not a parrot, and those that work together on their common goals in spite of a disagreement in another area is a parrot. good to live in bijou's world.
Click to expand...

That's quite a jumble you've got there, masquerading as a sensible interpretation. Have fun with it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top