Coffman Disappears “Comprehensive” From Immigration Reform

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.

16 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. ModeratusModeratus says:

    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.

    • DavieDavie says:

      OTOH, your determination to miss the point of the diary and deflect is pathetic.  No paycheck for you!

      • ModeratusModeratus says:

        My point is that the diary is pointless.

        • horseshit GOP front grouphorseshit GOP front group says:

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

        • ElliotFladenElliotFladen says:

          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. 

          • DavieDavie says:

            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. BlueCat says:

    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.

    • ModeratusModeratus says:

      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.

      • Ralphie says:

        Perfect Republican plan.  Then only rich people will be able to afford to eat.

      • BlueCat says:

        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. 

        • DawnPatrol says:

          +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?

        • BlueCat says:

          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..

        • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

          For a funny fantasy take on this, see "A Day Without a Mexican", by Sergio Arau. This excerpt is 10 minutes:

           

      • OrangeFreeOrangeFree says:

        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. 

        • Gray in Mountains says:

          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. gertie97 says:

    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 Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.