CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%↑

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

50%↑

15%

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Dave Williams

55%↑

45%↓

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 21, 2014 10:51 AM UTC

Coffman Disappears "Comprehensive" From Immigration Reform

  • 16 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Here's a fascinating little window into Rep. Mike Coffman's awkward dance around the issue of immigration. On Rep. Coffman's official congressional website, here's the summary text of Coffman's position on immigration reform as it exists today:

coffmanimmigration1 

But if you check this page against the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, you'll notice that Coffman's immigration issue page had slightly different language as recently as April 11th of this year:

coffmanimmigration2

As you can see, the word "comprehensive" has been edited out of Coffman's prescription for immigration reform. Of course, this wasn't the meaning of "comprehensive" in regards to immigration reform that most people think of, in fact it's kind of a cynical misuse of the term. After all, even Coffman says now that immigration reform should be about more than "comprehensive enforcement." And in all fairness, Coffman did add a line about "keeping families together"–though for all we know, that could mean keeping them together in deportation.

Either way you look at this, as ditching "comprehensive" immigration reform, or simply un-bastardizing the word "comprehensive," you can see Coffman struggling to get his message together.

Comments

16 thoughts on “Coffman Disappears “Comprehensive” From Immigration Reform

  1. Let's see, in the first version, Coffman says we have to secure the borders. And in the second version, he says secure the borders! What a flip flop!!

    Your desperation to attack Coffman every day leads to irrelevant silliness.

        1. Well, if you continually miss the point pretty much everything is pointless.  Poor Moddy is lost again.  Someone guide him home.

        2. This IS NOT pointless.  Coffman putting "comprehensive" in the position was a clear signal that he was willing to buck the nativists in an attempt to start fresh on issue.  Taking it out indicates that such a signal was BS from the beginning. 

          And honestly, this shouldn't have surprised me.  I remember thanking him in person last summer at a GOP barbecue for his recent openness on the issue.  Instead of being grateful or even receptive for my remark his facial reaction was that I had put a dead skunk in his hands.  I thought until recently I had been reading too much into things….but apparently I was dead on. 

          1. OTOH, if you tried to discuss this with Romanoff, he'd probably give you a big welcoming smile first, and then engage you in a serious conversation regarding immigration issues.  He's a good listener.

            There is a huge difference between Coffman and Romanoff –in style, intellect, attitudes, and most of all willingness to act. 

  2. Since it isn't pointless to anyone with a modicum of common sense, yours is a  very poor point. What a surprise. If you really think a word like "comprehensive" is no big deal in connection with the immigration reform debate and that its removal is meaningless, you really are hopeless.

    1. As Pols admitted, the only thing "comprehensive" Coffman spoke of before was enforcement. Coffman does not support the one-size-fits-all Democrat immigration bill, and he is right not to. Let's secure the border. That's what Coffman says and I agree.

      1. Want to know a secret, Modster? The last thing corporate Repugs want is a border that isn't porous enough to provide their companies and their class as a whole class with the all the cheap labor they want. They just want to keep it on a wink, wink basis to keep their cheap labor as powerless and compliant as possible. If every illegal immigrant was raptured off the planet tomorrow the US economy would come to standstill and they know it. Not to mention all those stranded kids, lawns, gardens, pools and how screwed their favorite fancy restaurants and hotels would be. Theborder is already more secure than ever and every bit as secure as they really want it. All that secure border talk is just for fund raising and vote getting from dumb schmucks like you. 

        1. +1.

          Ironic, isn't it, that it was the monied corporate interests (i.e GOTPers) seeking cheap, disposable labor that opened the door to the whole so-called "illegals" problem in the first place?

          So quickly (and conveniently) they forget, much like they have about the dozens and dozens of U.S diplomats and foreign-service personnel killed while the Bush 1 & 2 and Reagan admininstraitions held office. Where were their feigned outrage and "select committees" then?

        2. Missed while editing from "their whole class" to "their class as a whole". Didn't really need" their class as a whole class" Lord I miss the old editing..

      2. Securing the border is a red herring and you know it. We have sextupled the border patrol since 1992, and yet the problem still isn't fixed yet?

        Maybe you and your ilk need to stop taking the "we need to secure the border!" misdirection route and actually talk about real solutions. 

        1. The US/Mexico border IS secure. The economy that is apparently growing in Mexico, especially in contrast with ours, is likely a larger factor in decreased migration from Mexico

  3. I'm fascinated how the new & improved version calls for securing the border and enforcing laws without burdening the federal taxpayer. Does Coffman's fairy godmother have deep pockets?

     

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

143 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!