There was a lot of money appropriated already for fences that was never used. Busch was actually very pro reform, and there is a point that the republicans were obstructionist getting it done, both then and now. However, it was/is along the lines of secure borders first then reform. We went thru this before with the Reagan amnesty.
The problem I have with just saying, "we could do so much more if the repubs would just say yes". is it does not take into consideration WHY they are saying no. It's so much easier to say "they are protecting corporate interests and they hate the poor". (funny thing is both sides protect corporate interests, and I .really don't anyone who actively hates the poor, I think it's more a matter of being dismissive of them, but even that goes both ways, the dems just use my money (and yours) to make it seem like they care :D)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2014-06-30 01:42 am (UTC)Busch was actually very pro reform, and there is a point that the republicans were obstructionist getting it done, both then and now. However, it was/is along the lines of secure borders first then reform. We went thru this before with the Reagan amnesty.
The problem I have with just saying, "we could do so much more if the repubs would just say yes". is it does not take into consideration WHY they are saying no. It's so much easier to say "they are protecting corporate interests and they hate the poor". (funny thing is both sides protect corporate interests, and I .really don't anyone who actively hates the poor, I think it's more a matter of being dismissive of them, but even that goes both ways, the dems just use my money (and yours) to make it seem like they care :D)