Thursday, May 31, 2007
|
|
Can Any Immigration Bill Be Saved?
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
7:53 PM
|
|
Another day of interviews and calls, and my overwhelming sense is that the immigration bill as drafted is as dead as dead can be. The president's speech on Tuesday had the effect of throwing gas on the flames, and the anger has multiplied, and it isn't nativist in the least.
Could the bill be saved? Only if the Republican leadership comes back with a package of amendments which it announces beforehand and insists be voted on serially and all of which must be adopted if cloture is to be invoked on the final amended version. The choice before the Democrats is whether they will accept genuine enforcement (the whole fence first, big hikes in federal law enforcement beyond the Border Patrol, a burden of proof requirement on non-Spanish speaking immigrants from countries with jihadist networks and perhaps even for gang-age Spanish speakers etc.) What happened over the past ten days was a huge shift against the bill so that the amendment package must be real reform of the reform or the dead end will be reached. John McCain knew what he was doing when he demanded a jam down --the bill has lost support with every day of scrutiny.
Quick: Name one person who went from undecided or opposed to supporting since the bill was unveiled. Proponents have produced such a bad bill and marshalled such bad arguments that they have brought no one to their cause.
Expect more and more Democrats to try and keep the bill as it is because of the inferno on the right. Even lefties pushing for more family member migrations etc have got to see that unity in pushing the present version forward will splinter the GOP as surely as the Corn Laws did Peel's Tories or as Ireland did Gladstone's Liberals. If the GOP doesn't get its amendment package out and adopted, the Republican Leader has got to call a halt to the meltdown. See this story for a clue on the deep damage done to the GOP over the past few days.
At this point I take out my Harriet Miers Fan Club charter membership card and put it on the table: This push for this bill is a disaster, Mr. President. Much much worse than the Miers nomination on which you had many good arguments, or the ports deal, on which you had fewer. On this issue there is no place to stand, and you are asking your friends in the Senate to go down fighting for a bad bill. It is a bad bill because no one believes the government can conduct millions of background checks (many spokesmen for the bill don't even pretend to know where the paperwork will go!). No one believes the bill will halt the next 12 million. No one believes you are going to assure the fence gets built. No one believes that the employer verification system will get done or work when some half-assed version of it does get done. No one believes that the probationary visas don't automatically convert illegal aliens with few if any rights into Due Process Clause covered legal migrants, with a Ninth Circuit ready and waiting to keep them here for decades.
No one believes passing the bill will help catch the jihadist sleepers already in the country. The constituency that has always been with you except on the ports deal --the security voter-- has left the room. If you want them back, act quickly.
This isn't a talk radio fueled shout from the far right. It isn't the Minutemen or the Tancredo people. It is the GOP faithful who don't want it, nor anything like it.
Huddle up, D.C. GOPers, and unveil a new and very different, very improved version. Couple it with the argument that Hillary is coming and this is the best we will get if we lose the White House. But the deal has to be one worth taking, not the same deal we'd get under a second President Clinton. That's why the political rebelion is here: This looks like a bill that Hillary would have sold as tough on enforcement. We can wait two years for that.
Time's awasting.
It is just not believable. Fix it or kill it
|
|
If you agree with me Post many replies also urging people to use old fashioned techniques that will work to rid us of the invading hord of illegals. Please by word of mouth also suggest extreme violence against those who hire illegals. Go out and do your part to protect our country. Hurt someone badly that hires illegals, make sure they know why they have been hurt, and that it will get worse and worse unless they stop hiring illegals.
|
|
OK find some local businessmen who hire illegals Confront them and break an arm or a leg, give them a good beating, tell them this is just a warning. Tell them to Fire their illegal workers and not hire anymore. Tell them if they dont the next visit will result in their death. These are the only tactics that will work to take our country back. I urge you all now, to take violent action against those that hire illegals. |
|
While I am against the immigration bill for several reasons, using the passport processing backlog as an example of how government "can't do anything right," is at best disingenuous (besides being a red herring.)
Passport processing is pretty streamlined and fast EXCEPT when millions of people procrastinate when they know well in advance that changes are coming. There was a -what, 3 year?- notice that, in 2007 travelers to Mexico and Canada would now be required to have a passport. That's when I decided to renew mine and told my kids to get theirs as well. One of my sons traveled to Europe last summer and applied for his passport about two months before his planned departure. He received the passport well in advance of his trip.
The current backlog is merely the result of typical American procrastination. I have no sympathy for those who whine about this now.
THEY ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM! |
|
|
I don't think the bill needs to stay as it is. Obviously it is incredibly flawed and seems super, super ambitious. Clearly there is no way to keep 12 million immigrants in check and there is no way employers will be willing to keep those 12 million in check either. I'm sure they love employing people under the table, they pay less in taxes, their children will actually get financial aid in college, etc. Illegal immigration needs to be reformed, but not in the way that is being suggested. It's inefficient and will probably be ineffectual. |
|
Check Peggy Noonan's column in the WSJ (or opinionjournal.com). It's devastating for Bush, GOP. The immigration thing isn't the only nail in his coffin....it's the arrogance, etc. For me the last straw was his cave-in on global warming. Stick a fork in him. He's done. So sorry. There had been hope. Now, nothing |
|
There are extremists on both sides of the issue, bud.
The "racism" accusations are simply ad hominem attacks, the usual diversionary tactic attempted by those who have no rational or intellectual foundation upon which to base their position. It's an attempt to belittle their opponent, discredit him by casting aspersions on his motives, and is in fact an admission that the accuser's argument is intellectually bereft.
So those who actually are racist -- and there are some, no doubt -- are lacking in logic, but so are those handy with the accusations.
The vast majority opposed to this lipsticked pig do so on principle, like it or not.
|
|
of a bill.
It keeps this scamnesty issue alive in the election year, and THAT'S A GOOD THING.
Make these political hacks take a stand on scamnesty, and run on it. Make the GOP run for the SECOND TIME on it; let's see if they learned anything from last year's fraudulent fence bill, and the beating they took at the polls because everyone saw it for the lie it was.
|
|
|
I totally agree with Hugh on this one. This bill needs to seriously be changed or die. The government isn't going to be able to keep track of more than 10 million immigrants entering the United States. Even if they could, think of overpopulation. I sure as hell don't want to live all cramped up and fearing my neighbors. I also want to keep my job! This bill would allow so many immigrants that I KNOW they would get hired for a way cheaper wage and the citizens we have now will be fired and unemployed. In that sense, KILL THE BILL OR REVISE IT AND LOWER THE IMMIGRATION NUMBERS! |
|
Hospitals are overwhelmed with Americans who cannot pay what will happen when we flood our country with lower wage workers with no healthcare via the immigration bill? Do you think we will have more hospitals closing down after the immigration bill?
USATODAY-LOS ANGELES — A city prosecutor investigating whether hospitals are discharging homeless patients onto the city’s Skid Row says the latest alleged example “makes my stomach turn.”
A paralyzed man was found last week crawling the streets without a wheelchair and wearing a broken colostomy bag.
Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo accuses the hospital, Hollywood Presbyterian, of refusing to cooperate with his investigation. The hospital denied it.
READ MORE
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/hospital-dumping-of-patients
|
|
children resort to making up "quotes" and calling their opponents names ,especially when lacking rationality and/or substance.Hence... the smear job by (""Linda Chavez"")Brian232@AOL. Hugh will leave some or all up ,as the alledged townhall quotes are not findable, hence not linkable(pure cybersmoke). Robert Rector , on the otherhand,is findable,and would be a dandy addition to the substative debate of immigration control |
|
Townhall is catering to bigots and has banned this column. They will take it down in a few hours so read it while you can.
Chavez: Color-blind need to disavow those who aren't LINDA CHAVEZ Published: 06.01.2007
It seems I've touched a raw nerve among my fellow conservatives.
My column last week argued that "Some people just don't like Mexicans - or anyone else from south of the border," and that this sentiment was playing a destructive role in the current immigration debate.
I estimated the number of such persons in the general population at about 10 percent, a figure I extrapolated from several studies and polls of racial attitudes taken in the past 20 years, which generally show that about 1 in 10 Americans harbor some animus based on race.
Ten percent is not a very alarming number (Americans are among the least intolerant groups in all international studies of the issue), even though I think the group includes a disturbing number of influential voices on the right, who even if they don't personally share these views seem comfortable in the company of those who do.
Those in positions of influence, whether elected leaders or talk-show hosts, have a special responsibility not to inflame racial passions and animosities.
So how is it that some of my fellow conservatives have demonstrated that I am wrong to think a small group of them might not want Mexicans to come to America - even legally?
On Townhall.com, these bon mots appeared:
- "Mexicans are pigs."
- "They can be referred to as Human Locusts."
- "Latino girls are baby factories. They fornicate like animals with no regard for the welfare of the child. Babies having babies while the boy goes out and screws someone else. Most Latinos are liars. True again. Look at the corruption at all levels of the Mexican government, and it carries on to all the people."
- "We don't want Spanish- speaking little retards befouling our great country. REMEMBER SAN JACINTO!"
- "And, yes, illegals are lazy, disease-infested, freeloading moochers. The fact they criminally enter the country qualifies them as lazy freeloaders."
- "Get a clue, Chavez. . . . we don't want wetbacks mooching our system and, no, we don't need them. They are simply slave labor. Nothing more."
I could go on. There are more than 300 posts on Townhall and hundreds more on less mainstream sites. You get the point.
But because I've exposed the underbelly of the anti-immigrant crowd - and let's be clear here, this debate is about more than illegal immigration - I'm called a racist, as in this post: "Linda Chavez has revealed herself to be a racist who demonizes color-blind conservatives as racist. Special rights for Latino criminal invaders and mindless labeling to intimidate fair-minded Americans - that is what Linda stands for now."
I want more secure borders and an end to illegal immigration, but the only way that will ever happen is to adopt a market-based legal immigration system that allows sufficient numbers of workers to come here to fill jobs Americans shun.
I've spent my entire professional career fighting against racial, ethnic and gender preferences; against bilingual education and multiculturalism; and for making English the official language of the country, for which I have suffered significant abuse, even physical attack.
But I reject the view that our immigration policy should ever be premised on a racial test, or that members of one group are unfit to become Americans.
Most conservatives claim to be color-blind, but remaining silent in the face of such bigotry evokes Edmund Burke's dictum: "It is necessary only for the good man to do nothing for evil to triumph." It's time for those who are color-blind to disavow those who are not. |
|
Townhall is catering to bigots and has banned this column. They will take it down in a few hours so read it while you can.
Chavez: Color-blind need to disavow those who aren't LINDA CHAVEZ Published: 06.01.2007
It seems I've touched a raw nerve among my fellow conservatives.
My column last week argued that "Some people just don't like Mexicans - or anyone else from south of the border," and that this sentiment was playing a destructive role in the current immigration debate.
I estimated the number of such persons in the general population at about 10 percent, a figure I extrapolated from several studies and polls of racial attitudes taken in the past 20 years, which generally show that about 1 in 10 Americans harbor some animus based on race.
Ten percent is not a very alarming number (Americans are among the least intolerant groups in all international studies of the issue), even though I think the group includes a disturbing number of influential voices on the right, who even if they don't personally share these views seem comfortable in the company of those who do.
Those in positions of influence, whether elected leaders or talk-show hosts, have a special responsibility not to inflame racial passions and animosities.
So how is it that some of my fellow conservatives have demonstrated that I am wrong to think a small group of them might not want Mexicans to come to America - even legally?
On Townhall.com, these bon mots appeared:
- "Mexicans are pigs."
- "They can be referred to as Human Locusts."
- "Latino girls are baby factories. They fornicate like animals with no regard for the welfare of the child. Babies having babies while the boy goes out and screws someone else. Most Latinos are liars. True again. Look at the corruption at all levels of the Mexican government, and it carries on to all the people."
- "We don't want Spanish- speaking little retards befouling our great country. REMEMBER SAN JACINTO!"
- "And, yes, illegals are lazy, disease-infested, freeloading moochers. The fact they criminally enter the country qualifies them as lazy freeloaders."
- "Get a clue, Chavez. . . . we don't want wetbacks mooching our system and, no, we don't need them. They are simply slave labor. Nothing more."
I could go on. There are more than 300 posts on Townhall and hundreds more on less mainstream sites. You get the point.
But because I've exposed the underbelly of the anti-immigrant crowd - and let's be clear here, this debate is about more than illegal immigration - I'm called a racist, as in this post: "Linda Chavez has revealed herself to be a racist who demonizes color-blind conservatives as racist. Special rights for Latino criminal invaders and mindless labeling to intimidate fair-minded Americans - that is what Linda stands for now."
I want more secure borders and an end to illegal immigration, but the only way that will ever happen is to adopt a market-based legal immigration system that allows sufficient numbers of workers to come here to fill jobs Americans shun.
I've spent my entire professional career fighting against racial, ethnic and gender preferences; against bilingual education and multiculturalism; and for making English the official language of the country, for which I have suffered significant abuse, even physical attack.
But I reject the view that our immigration policy should ever be premised on a racial test, or that members of one group are unfit to become Americans.
Most conservatives claim to be color-blind, but remaining silent in the face of such bigotry evokes Edmund Burke's dictum: "It is necessary only for the good man to do nothing for evil to triumph." It's time for those who are color-blind to disavow those who are not. |
|
Townhall is catering to bigots and has banned this column. They will take it down in a few hours so read it while you can.
Chavez: Color-blind need to disavow those who aren't LINDA CHAVEZ Published: 06.01.2007
It seems I've touched a raw nerve among my fellow conservatives.
My column last week argued that "Some people just don't like Mexicans - or anyone else from south of the border," and that this sentiment was playing a destructive role in the current immigration debate.
I estimated the number of such persons in the general population at about 10 percent, a figure I extrapolated from several studies and polls of racial attitudes taken in the past 20 years, which generally show that about 1 in 10 Americans harbor some animus based on race.
Ten percent is not a very alarming number (Americans are among the least intolerant groups in all international studies of the issue), even though I think the group includes a disturbing number of influential voices on the right, who even if they don't personally share these views seem comfortable in the company of those who do.
Those in positions of influence, whether elected leaders or talk-show hosts, have a special responsibility not to inflame racial passions and animosities.
So how is it that some of my fellow conservatives have demonstrated that I am wrong to think a small group of them might not want Mexicans to come to America - even legally?
On Townhall.com, these bon mots appeared:
- "Mexicans are pigs."
- "They can be referred to as Human Locusts."
- "Latino girls are baby factories. They fornicate like animals with no regard for the welfare of the child. Babies having babies while the boy goes out and screws someone else. Most Latinos are liars. True again. Look at the corruption at all levels of the Mexican government, and it carries on to all the people."
- "We don't want Spanish- speaking little retards befouling our great country. REMEMBER SAN JACINTO!"
- "And, yes, illegals are lazy, disease-infested, freeloading moochers. The fact they criminally enter the country qualifies them as lazy freeloaders."
- "Get a clue, Chavez. . . . we don't want wetbacks mooching our system and, no, we don't need them. They are simply slave labor. Nothing more."
I could go on. There are more than 300 posts on Townhall and hundreds more on less mainstream sites. You get the point.
But because I've exposed the underbelly of the anti-immigrant crowd - and let's be clear here, this debate is about more than illegal immigration - I'm called a racist, as in this post: "Linda Chavez has revealed herself to be a racist who demonizes color-blind conservatives as racist. Special rights for Latino criminal invaders and mindless labeling to intimidate fair-minded Americans - that is what Linda stands for now."
I want more secure borders and an end to illegal immigration, but the only way that will ever happen is to adopt a market-based legal immigration system that allows sufficient numbers of workers to come here to fill jobs Americans shun.
I've spent my entire professional career fighting against racial, ethnic and gender preferences; against bilingual education and multiculturalism; and for making English the official language of the country, for which I have suffered significant abuse, even physical attack.
But I reject the view that our immigration policy should ever be premised on a racial test, or that members of one group are unfit to become Americans.
Most conservatives claim to be color-blind, but remaining silent in the face of such bigotry evokes Edmund Burke's dictum: "It is necessary only for the good man to do nothing for evil to triumph." It's time for those who are color-blind to disavow those who are not. |
|
Scare tactics alert..."Hillary will jam it down our collective throats,so take what you can..." Any idealists left who think a sane senator will filabuster the treasonous version circa '08 to'12 I-reform???? think Hugh's starting to get it? Dean did. We'll know Hugh gets it when he interveiws ... Robert Recter,of the Heritage Foundation, on the air,& does a transcript. This is about sovereignty,jobs,assimilation,and passing America, and American values ,on to our children,to future generations.
|
|
Joe, did you read that?
A REAL MAN as president can do it...quickly.
I'd even be willing to help round up illegals...for free. Heck, the jobsite I just left had a dozen or more.
How do I know? I asked them, "De donde es usted?" I got every answer from Chihuahua to Chiapas.
One more thing Joe, I'm not afraid of Mexicans. I know many Mexicans and consider them friends. Of course, they all live in Mexico (I go every year and just returned last week). Illegals can get bent. |
|
ONE: The border needs to be secure (NOT to prevent Mexicans from crossing the border, but to prevent ANYONE who has not been checked out, and authorized to enter the country in accordance with our immigration laws from just walking across the border). Yes, that means terrorists, too.
TWO: Enforce the laws against employing illegal aliens (fines/prison for employers who do so). Yes, this means that the government MUST create a SECURE and EFFECTIVE means by which employers can verify (without risk of punishment) the legal status of applicants.
That's it. You DON'T need to round up and deport anyone. If you control who gets in, and make it impossible for them to earn a penny if they DO get here, then they'll leave on their own.
IF, however, Congress believes that the NUMBER of LEGAL immigrants should be increased - DO IT.
There's NOTHING stopping you from simply increasing the number of people we allow in LEGALLY.
What's WRONG, is to allow a bunch of people to jump the fence of a sporting event, then simply have them pay a fine, and allow them to remain and watch the game (even though there are people waiting in line, outside, to buy their tickets - some of whom have been waiting a LONG time to get their tickets, and SOME will be denied).
Oh yeah, and those in favor of the Amnesty Bill not only want to allow those who are in the country illegally to remain, they want them to be able to bring their entire families, too.
Like I said, increase the number of people (from ALL countries) who can legally come to America. Then let everyone who wants legal status to get in line, like everyone else (from every other country) - outside the fence, like everyone else. |
|
Fifty-three years ago, when newly elected Dwight Eisenhower moved into the White House, America’s southern frontier was as porous as a spaghetti sieve. As many as 3 million illegal migrants had walked and waded northward over a period of several years for jobs in California, Arizona, Texas, and points beyond.
President Eisenhower cut off this illegal traffic. He did it quickly and decisively with only 1,075 United States Border Patrol agents - less than one-tenth of today’s force. The operation is still highly praised among veterans of the Border Patrol.
Then on June 17, 1954, what was called “Operation xetback” began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.
By mid-July, the crackdown extended northward into Utah, Nevada, and Idaho, and eastward to Texas. By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 illegals had left the Lone Star State voluntarily.
So much for the lying propaganda coming out of this Whitehouse and its minions that it is impossiable to deport them. Ike did it in less than a year. |
|
|
Anybody who suppoerts this amnesty bill is in need of major mental rebuild. All you need do is look who Sir Drinks A Lot used to help develop this horrible piece of work: (1)The National Council of LaRaza (2) The ACLU (3) The National Immigration Law Center (4) The Service Employers International Union (5) The Essential Worker Immigration Coalition. Another thing, the government keeps saying they can't deport 20 million illegals. You can bet you butt they can track 12 million gunowners in minutes. As far as Bush jr is concerned he can trot to he** on a fast horse as far as I am concerned. DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHO CROSSED THE BORDER TODAY? |
|
|
|
You must have missed this one:
Words Matter If we are seen as anti-immigrant, we will lose, because everyone knows some or is one or two generations removed and generally Americans have been a welcoming people. We just want people to respect us, our country, our culture, our language and our laws. Illegal alien is the legal status of a citizen of another country who is here without documentation. It is illegal aliens not immigrants who are creating a problem. Immigrants get visas before entering. Illegal aliens prefer the term migrant, but do not have an open-ended right to migrate from their countries to ours. The debate must center on the willful disregard for the laws of this country. My point is illegal aliens are not immigrants. Immigrants seek our permission first by applying for a visa. They keep their documents in order and comply with our laws. Illegal aliens do not. They sneak across the border and acquire fraudulent I.D. The open borders crowd know that most Americans are predisposed to favor legal immigration. By purposely confusing illegal aliens with(legal)immigrants (really the only kind), the left and the media hope to marginalize those of us who are speaking out against amnesty as being xenophobic, nativist, racist, restrictionist, anti-immigrant bigots. I am not any of those. I am an American citizen whose citizenship means something to him. I like immigrants. I know people from all over the world. I am totally opposed to amnesty for illegal aliens, regardless of where they are from. I am for retaining our rule of law and sovereignty. We will lose this fight like we lost in 1986 if we aren't clear in our language and stick to the facts. |
|
The WSJ is suggesting that we will lose the next election if we do not pass this bill. What a scam.
All of the polls that I have seen indcate that Independents hate this bill more than Rep and Dems. This is a great cross over issue. We will win the next election if we have the immigration issue to use against the Dems.
Whatever Hispanics we lose will more than be made up for from Independents and Dems.
The only way we can lose 2008 is if Bush and McCain pass this bill and blow up the party. Even if Iraq is not settled we can win if we have the immigration issue.
No wonder Kennedy is trying to ram this thru now. I hope McCain gets clobbered in the next debate on immigration.
|
|
Real American writes: Friday, June, 01, 2007 1:11 PM TOWNHALL IS CATERING TO THE BIGOTS
There will always be bigotry. That's just a fact. Doesn't make it right though.
Racism charges cheapen this debate because this bill is a pig no matter what your race is. It is a stupid effort in all languages.
It offends the sensibilities, or should, of all US citizens, of all ethnic origins.
Don't make this a TOWNHALL problem.
Illeagals must go!
|
|
|
Sad- many people have awoken from thier slumber regarding Bush. They have gone from at one point thinking he may have been one of the best Presidents in history to realizing that he is one of the very worst. |
|
Hugh says: "It is a bad bill because no one believes the government can conduct millions of background checks (many spokesmen for the bill don't even pretend to know where the paperwork will go!)."
Truer words were never spoken. The government can't even do passports. My daughter applied for one March 5. It was supposed to take 10-12 weeks, so she's past that time frame. The website says to call to inquire about its status if you are traveling withing the next two weeks. She's leaving for Europe on Friday, June 15th. Today is Friday, June 1, so she called. They told her to call back tomorrow, because it's technically 15 days before she leaves, not 14. Dubious math and typical government customer service standards aside, the point is...if they can't even get a passport application for a US citizen processed within 12 weeks, how in the world can they possible run the background checks they're proposing on 12 million non-US citizens??? |
|
|
No more support for Bush now. And I was completely behind him the last two elections. Never thought I would agree with the moonbats on anything, but as far as I'm concerned, I don't care about ever hearing anything Bush has to say again, wish the dumb nut would resign. And that goes for Lyndsay Graham too, and all the rest of the Republicans using liberal talking points to badger their base. We are not bigots. I love immigration. I love LEGAL immigration. |
|
|
How about Kay Bailey-Hutchinson? What do ya think Rove has on her? |
|
..we REALLY need'em?! I'm with Gabby, Ron, and Dan! Mr. President- ENFORCE OUR LAWS! (Didn't you promise that at your inaugurals?) We have laws about immigration NOW! Enforce the law! BUILD THE FENCE! |
|
Simply build the 2006 authorized fence, hire the border agents, and then after the border is secure and illegal immigrant traffic is shut, down put in place a temporary worker permit system.
The problem is if you don't build the fence and secure the border, as soon as employers figure out their $4 an hour labor is being replaced with legal minimum wage plus taxes, they will simply wait for the next wave of illegals immigrants. Meanwhile the US welfare rolls grow with no end in sight, just like Europe. |
|
|
This abomination of a bill will sail thru the Senate and Pelosi will push it through the House, any promise to secure the border will never be funded and Chertoff will sign off on all the security "triggers" without any regard to fact. Millions of illegals are flooding over our borders bearing false documents saying they were here before Jan 2007 already and if ICE can't disprove them in one short 8 hour day (minus lunch and breaks) then they are here forever. We voted for RINOs once too often because they weren't quite as bad as the Democrats and this is where we ended up. Forget immigration enforcement, deportation, national security and get used to the NEW WORLD ORDER. |
|
|
In fact, when Romney slowed down and focused on a single issue — immigration — at a press conference in Dover, N.H., the brazen cynicism of his candidacy became almost embarrassing. He has flipped on immigration, to better suit the Mexican-fearing tendencies of a segment of the Republican base. He's against the comprehensive reform bill being considered by the Senate, and, of course, that's because the bill would offer a path to citizenship for the 12 million illegals currently in the country. A reporter asks, What would you do about them? Make them get in the back of the line. Would they have to leave the country to do that? Mumble mumble evasion. Would you be in favor of kicking them out? Oh, no, not that. Then what would you actually favor? "I'm not going to lay down a posture different from the others being considered." Interesting: Romney takes postures, not positions. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1626721,00.html |
|
"At this point I take out my Harriet Miers Fan Club charter membership card and put it on the table: This push for this bill is a disaster, Mr. President."
Ok, Hugh is putting this forward as a show of loyality (see I was dumb enough to support Harriet Miers Mr. President, I really, really must be loyal. . . ). Still, it is a start on the road to curing your Blind Bush Alliegance Disorder ("BBAD").
For all you clamoring to kill the bill with no alternative, remember that the status quo sucks, a few of you just don't like too many brown skinned people around, and you don't recognize just as many illegals come through our airports and simply overstay their visas. But I agree with you the current bill will not work. We should be striving to fix it and frankly it is an effort that will take years. |
|
At the moment this bill is a win/win for the Democrats. Hugh wants the Republican package of reforms as it will act as a poison pill and force the Dems to kill it. At the moment this bill is a lose/lose for the Reps. It rips the party to shreds and will cause a 3rd party if passed.
Kennedy arranged the timeing of this bill as he knew it would tube McCain and his candidacy. The Kennedy wing also knew it would cause trouble for the centrist Dems and the Rep Party. For the most part the Kennedy wing are in safe districts.
For the Kennedy wing it is a bad bill but they know that the enforcement provisions will not get enforced and after they get amnesty and the destruction of the Rep party they can amend it as they will be controling the government. |
|
Awww. It looks like wittle Wepublicans are upset with GW. Hmm, what could it be!? In a word, you guys don't know how to read people. For all your talk about character--or the lack thereof (where your political opponents are concerned)--you don't know who has it and who doesn't. Bush is the same now as he has been and will be. It is only in the vapor of your seriously underdeveloped moral imagination that he has risen and fallen. That you did not know this man for what he was speaks more to you than to him.
You guys need to find that moral sweetspot, between heros and villians, adoration and vituperation. Its not hard to do. Just drop the cartoonish nonsense and become an adult human being. Occupy moral space that is less concerned with "clarity," and more concerned with truth, no matter how messy and ambiguous moral truth may be. For the Republican basers are right about some things, and one of them is that the moral universe has an objective foundation, that it is the same for you and me. Unfortunately, this insight has not been accompanied by wisdom or decent moral judgement. More than anything, GW's political success is proof that men of sterling character are not necessarily good judges of sterling character. |
|
President Bush has once again demonstrated poor judgment on protecting our Country. Does anyone think it is a good idea to pull border agents and airport screeners to guard candidates?
Currant-WASHINGTON — The U.S. Secret Service expects to borrow more than 2,000 immigration officers and federal airport screeners next year to help guard an ever-expanding field of presidential candidates.
READ MORE
http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/bush-pulls-border-and-airport-screeners
|
|
Spin it as they may.. this S. 1348 is an amnesty bill in disguise. There is No such thing as an Immigration Reform Bill which does not insist on "border enforcement first". No all inclusive comprephensive "mishmash" immigration bill can be processed, scrutinized, enforced or even comprehended by most..and they know it. The proposed elements which are to kick-in after eight years are pure "sucker bait", in my opinion. This bill rewards Law Breakers including Gang Bangers & Mideast Jihadis. (Are they insane?) This is a magnet for more disaster!
I strongly resent El Presidente Bush (and his insults) and the handful of arrogant politicians who expect Americans to turn over the keys to the kingdom to every person who snuck in here illegally, and to every one who can manage to invade us in the meantime.(including the diseased).
And they want to throw away our children's birthright? HOW DARE THEY. I vow to try to replace every traitor politician who votes for this amnesty! |
|
"ONLY if Rockefellers keep supporting the DEMOCRATS."
The Rockefellers ARE the democrat party.
|
|
Kill this stupid bill and write a new one.
Something like:
Amnesty will lose our nation and our sovereignty.
Instead: Close the border--solid. The fence and enough border guards to ensure compliance. Use of National Guard if necessary.
Force ALL 20 million illegal mexicans out. 1.Jail time for illegals and deported if not employed otherwise just deport. 1a. Hire another 20,000 investigators to find illegals. 1b.Cut government funds to states that hinder the investigations. 2.Major fines for employers who hire illegals, 2a.$25,000 base fine plus $5,000/illegal. 3.ALL Americans must apply for, and obtain, a tamperproof identity card with picture and thumbprint. 3a.Citizens must prove they are citizens with this application. ALL public advertising must be in english. No more printing of forms for every language possible. This is an ENGLISH nation.
Must have a green card to re-enter our country. Must speak english, no criminal record in either country. Green cards processed in maybe two-three entry points. Any proof of a job waiting in our country or a former job held here gets priority.
An application for citizenship could be tendered at any time. The old requirements for naturalized citizenship apply. Speak/read/write English. Understanding of constitution, Have a job waiting. Have a sponsor. etc.
A bill along those lines would solve the problem, I think. The secure border FIRST! The rest of it would be useless without a secure border.
|
|
|
there is a problem in this country with the media. We do not see the truth about the real agenda of Mexico. They can and are taking land by shear population. They do not want to be American, why do we have everything from instructions to phone calls in spanish? If we were serious about this we would get the people who hire them and put them in jail. The illegals would be forced to go home. If they are such hard wokers why don't they build up their own country?The congress has lost touch with reality. Go to any big city neighborhood in the United States and see that the shear numbers of Mexicans and South American Country's people are taking over the neighborhoods. The media never shows the negative in any of this,why is this?In Massachusetts the illeagals are protesting against being deported. What is that about? If I went to Mexico and protested in the street with an American flag I'd be killed. I say put the employers in jail and the illegals will GO HOME. |
|
What are the goals of immigration? Clearly, business must concede that "what is good for business is good for America," is not the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help me God.
I note that the Commerce department is but a faction within the greater government. Likewise, business is but a subset of the greater American nation. Confusing the two as synonymous is a gross aggrandizement.
For another consideration I recommend Mr. Krikorian's "Without Merit" here: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzhjOTdhM2UzY2Q3NjUxN2EzM2NkMmIwNjJkZWMxYjk=
|
|
|
|
There are only two provisions that need to be written into an immigration bill.
1. Built the fence and lock down the border.
2. Fine employers heavily for hiring illegals (knowingly or not) and reqire them to provide one-way airfare to the aliens point of origin.
3. Put a 7-year moratorium on all new immigration applications to allow the current immigrants to assimilate and not clump into perpetual enclaves.
This is a plan every American who has America's best interest at heart will support without hesitation! |
|
|
the illegals fill the sub-minimum-wage market and others that Americans are not allowed to thx to oppressive laws. legalizing them defeats the purpose for businesses! |
|
|
Washington is burning while Bush fiddles with childlike glee. the Dems can pass the bill party-line and he'll sign it with a grin |
|
George Bush is a dimwitted fool if you ask me. This immigration nonsense he is pushing will wreck the United States financially. What sane country would take in 30 to 50 million low skilled workers and their family members in the information age?!?!
This isn't about race. My opposition to this piece of legislation is rooted 100% in the predictable decline in our national quality of life. If we were taking in 10 million engineers and scientists I would say "great!" Our schools, our jails, our entire social welfare system will be pushed over the edge.
|
|
|
I meant: even with security elements. |
|
|
Have no bill, even on security, then have this thing go through. Give this issue to the Republican nominee to run on, for conservative Republicans to run on in primaries and beyond, and conservatives will sweep all and everything. |
|
|
that Dan could make a post on him that is 100% correct. ouch |
|
I don't think Hugh is seeing this clearly. The bill is a disaster, it is 'sh*&', etc. The Senate Imperium does not care. The mantra of McConnel, Kyl, etc. is ANY BILL is better than no bill.
I know a gal that wrote McConnel on the last bill in 2006, his view then was the same. He is LESS conservative than Frist. I have followed all the amendment votes. It is clear that he gang of 12 controls most amendments by swapping (Kennedy supports guest workers, Graham, et. al., protects amnesty and sanctuary cities).
The only interest that is NOT protected is the border. The left and the RINOs could care less, and the pubs are wiennies.
Nope it is going through largely intact. The last stop is the HOUSE...
I think Hugh is assuming that all the experts are being listened too...I doubt it.
|
|
|
the Constitution of this country was written, by hand, in 4 pages. a law written 200x longer is not 200x better (quite the opposite) |
|
Hawkeye, me too, I must confess myself shocked, completely shocked by this attempt to ram down the American people's throat something they don't want, and don't want by a SUPERMAJORITY.
A SUPERMAJORITY of the American people want the border secured.
Yet the creature REFUSES, POINTBLANK REFUSES to secure the borders of this, the last, best hope of man on Earth.
Yet the creature tells us repeatedly that the first, THE FIRST thing he thinks of in the morning is America's national security.
Here follows a brief list of the creature's many lies, in no particular order:
1} "The Palestinians are a partner in the peace process;"
2} "The Saudis are our friends and allies in the war on terror;"
3} "Harriet Meirs is the best qualified candidate for the high court;"
4} "Islam is a religion of peace;"
5} "The terrorists have hijacked a great and peaceful religion;"
6} "Brownie, you're doing a great job;"
7} "Governor Blanco and Mayor Nagin are doing a great job."
Feel free to add your own fond remembrance of this President to the list! |
|
If an invader was coming to your castle with the intent to steal from you, and fell in the moat, would you fish him out and hand him all your stuff?
If you do, you are a fool!
There was a story about a guy who tried to break into a school by crawling in through an air duct. I guess the B&E business was better than he realized, because he had gotten fatter and got stuck in the shaft! Well, they didn't find him until weeks later his rotting carcass began to smell!
Think I feel sorry for him?
I told that story to illustrate my point. There are some things in this world that are not worth saving! |
|
So what have learned about the illegal immigration bill, a.k.a. the amnesty bill.
A cobbled illegal immigration bill is necessary because?
There won’t be enough votes to pass it otherwise.
1) There are Border Security votes. 2) There are Route to Citizenship votes. 3) There are we need Labor votes.
Lose any of the aforementioned and it won’t pass. Can’t prioritize because it falls apart if everything isn't all done at once. We have to have everything at one and the same time, in the bill that is, because as we all know there are triggers. Unh hunh.
"Route" to citizenship: is supported by the open boarder crowd, meaning in particular the Democratic party and other altruistic and dare I say it cynics who for opposite reasons collide in the hope that they'll reap the benefit of the new voters. Open boarders now and forever: The open borders people see this bill as nothing less than another step toward their goal.
And seeing as how people walk and swim faster than we can build a fence, a cobbled amnesty bill will open the flood gates until such time the fence is built, whenever that will be. Whatever else one says about open borders this much is true: we surrender our sovereignty.
Labor needs: meaning we need cheap labor or the US economy will collapse. Talk about a scare tactic. St. George Utah, we hear, will waste away to a mere dust mote if we don't allow illegal immigrants to build the homes. Poppycock.
When young I tried my hand, at the urging of some friends, to give cement work a go. Hard work that. I confess this was a short lived occupation for myself, but for some of my friends it was not. The point here, is that, there are still many young men who do not jump into college but still prefer the jingle of coins in their pocket to the sound of poverty.
What really is the impact of illegals in the labor market, not just from the point-of-view of the employer, but also on the employee? In any case, I'm not part of the round em up and send them home crowd, but I do think the doom and gloom that life will come to a screeching halt if they left is just a bit over stated.
Anyway, why then can't we provide for a one or two year temporary bump in visas issued for legal aliens to come and work while we study, and note that we would have fresh data, the immigration needs and visa entrance needs of the country?
*********
So to restate, we can't prioritize these disparate considerations because they all have to be legislated simultaneously or the whole endeavor falls off the cliff.
I disagree. Actually, what we know is we have to have the border secured. That is without question. Let's build the whole fence and prepare the other border controls, immigration controls, within a year--fund it.
In the meantime, we can leave well enough alone on those who are already here; some will leave and some won't.
Then at such time as we are ready to process them (illegals), with an administrative infrastructure tested and ready to go, we can have this gargantuan Ells Island moment that the country has weighed in on and agreed to.
That's what I'm thinking anyway.
|
|
|
|
Why of all times do this just prior to a major presidential election, unless you just want to destroy the Republican party?
I always laughed at the libs who said Bush was stupid.
Well you know what libs? I disagree with you on everything else, but on this, I happily eat my words.
Bush is a moron. |
|
What hits me more than anything on this is just an emotion: utter shock at the total backstab that this represents from those in power to the loyal base. Shoot, we've carried water for Bush for 6 years over the war in Iraq, hoping he could/would make something happen. And now this.
Crap on him. As far as I'm concerned the Republican party is trash, at least the elected ones.
This bill is a big middle-finger to those of us on the right.
I'm a conservative, not a republican.
|
|
Three strikes have recently been thrown.
1} Bush's Kyoto capitulation.
2} Bush's promise to Biden that he will sign the equally disastrous LAW OF THE SEA TREATY.
3} "Comprehensive" immigration reform.
That's it for me.
Does anything more need to be said?
And FOR ALL THOSE that defended Bush during the Meirs debacle, who said that he was privately convinced that she was truly a "conservative," and that he was not trying to put another Souter up on the high court, for all of those people, ........................................ WOULD YOU CARE to revisit your position?
I've NO DOUBT that he FULLY, DELIBERATELY, PRE-MEDITATIVELY INTENDED, PURPOSED, DETERMINED to appoint another Souter.
As the father offset the appointment of Thomas with Souter, so the son fully intended to offset the appointment of Roberts with a Meirs.
This guy has been DETERMINED, this guy has FULLY INTENDED, this guy has PURPOSELLY DONE EVERYTHING he could of late to drive a stake into the Reagan/Gingrich revolution.
He has openly, nakedly, clearly declared war, complete war upon the base of the Grand Old Party.
He has declared war against the platform of the GOP.
He, LIKE HIS FATHER BEFORE HIM, fully intends to drag from the tomb, the sickly, corrupted corpse of Rockefeller Republicanism.
And he's doing it, hour by hour, day by day, miserable month that follows miserable month.
And he has to be stopped, NOT JUST FOR THE sake of the GOP, but for the country at large.
I want this bill DESTROYED.
I want this President to become the most lame duck President of this, or any other age.
I want him to know that there is NOTHING that he can advance domestically.
I want this creature to understand that his legacy will be determined by events in Iraq.
If the creature understands that, then, maybe then, the creature will be focus on Iraq as he should be focused on Iraq.
But if the creature is allowed to delude himself that a legacy can still be forged away from Iraq, then the misguided creature, searching for love in all the wrong places, will continue to enact a liberal agenda, wholly hostile to Conservatism and wholly hostile to the well-being of the country at large.
The creature must be stopped.
|
|
Did anyone else see the bit buried in an interview yesterday with McClatchy News -- the same one in which the President feared America is "losing its soul" -- in which the President "expressed hope that the changes would reduce the need for a fence along the border with Mexico."
Also: the President: "A lot of these ranchers down there are saying, 'Wait a minute. Bad idea.' I presume we’re not going to build a fence on places where people don’t want it."
http://www.sanluisobispo.com/425/story/54046.html
I'm more baffled than ever...a program that is going to make it more attractive than ever for Mexicans to come to the U.S. is going to reduce a need for a border fence? I thought border security was what the President was promising (not that I believe it) in order to assure that no further illegal aliens enter and need to be "regularized"?
Best wishes, Laura Laura's Miscellaneous Musings http://laurasmiscmusings.blogspot.com/ |
|
The House is where this must be killed. The Senate will pass it. They sold us out last year. The only thing that has changed is that we lost a few votes. We all know the President will sign it no matter how bad it is. Every House member is up for re-election in 2008. Democrat and Republican. Everyone has to contact their House member, get your neighbors, friends, co-workers, etc. to do the same. Whether you voted for them or not, they need to hear from you. You can find them here:
http://www.house.gov.com/
|
|
(hit the post button too soon) Americans want their government to do its job. Secure the border. Enforce the law. Deport illegal aliens. Arrest and prosecute employers of illegal aliens. My concern is that W. wants this so much he does not care if it destroys the GOP. I still think he pushes this through the Senate, but it dies in the House. The acrimony of this extended bruising fight will result in fewer GOP Senators. My own Senator Warner will be retiring whether he knows it or not. This President has shown he will not enforce the law. We need to be darn sure the next one will.
http://www.gohunter08.com
|
|
Has anyone fisked Tony Snow's appearance on O'Reilly tonight? O'Reilly's sympathetic to the bill and didn't strongly follow up. Still, for anyone informed person, Tony was hollow. Tony pushed the background checks without mentioning that they must be done in 24hrs. Tony pushed the idea that Bush has been strong on the border, without mentioning the fence has been cut in half from October. O'Reilly pushed the idea that 30% of Americans want deportation of 12 million or is it 20 million or nothing. I haven't heard anyone advocate that.
I'd love to see a total fisking of Tony on this. |
|
|
Hugh is absolutely correct about one thing. We do not believe any of the promises in this bill because of all the lies from 1986 to the present. Particularly galling has been the name calling from people of my own party. If the GOP does not want to go the way of the Whigs they had better kill this quickly. Much more abusing their voters and they won't have any next election. |
|
Can anyone explain why is our economy so disfuctional that we need millions of low paid foreigners to make it work? The same thing happened in Europe 30-35 years ago when West Germany felt a need to import Turkish guestworkers. Is there a sturctural flaw in our capital system that necessitates these workers.
When I grew up in the fifties, Americans thought nothing of doing jobs like digging ditches, bussing tables and repairing roofs. What has changed? |
|
Hugh,
Thanks for walking point on this disaster.
I heard the Sec of Commerce on Cavuto totally misrepresenting the bill, please keep getting the truth out there.
I supported Bush, voted twice for him, now he does this to us. I hate to admit, but those who accused him of arrogance and unwillingness to listen were right. |
|
Enforcement first - then the rest - we were fooled once in 1986 with "comprehensive" reform - we only saw the amnesty part - NEVER AGAIN.
Show me - if you are serious about enforcement- build the fence, increase the number guarding our border (and stop arresting them for stopping drug runners). When we see a decline in illegals and INCREASE in arrests, we will know it is working.
The 27% drop in arrests can easily be explained by the fact that there has been an increase in Border Agents being charged for arresting criminals - I would look the other way too. |
|
I'm with Mark H, I haven't seen or heard anything that gives me optimism that the Senate RINO's are going to cave to overwhelming popular opinion -- quite the opposite in fact. Have you all heard the statements of Trent Lott, Robert Bennett, Mitch McConnell, Lindsay Graham, John Kyl, Johnny Isakson, Saxby Chambliss, John McCain, and others? Nothing leads me to believe these guys are going to turn against their big business and Ag interest fat cat donors. Believe me I want to be wrong, and I hope that I'm just out of the loop on this one here. But somebody give me something concrete or "inside" that warrants this optimism.
Then there's the House. I look at them as a 2nd parachute -- I think it will work, but I sure as hell don't want to have to use it and find out! Too many back door deals and other shenanigans with Pelosi at the helm. Remember, the Democrats run the House and this bill would guarantee their dominance for -- well forever! I can't believe they wouldn't do everything in their power to sign a bill that guarantees them power, money, and socialism for time en memorium.
It ain't over till it's over. Don't let up and keep up the pressure! |
|
Hugh:
I Hope they're listening.
I Fear they are not.
I Pray they will.
|
|
I saw Tony Snow on O'Reilly's show trying to defend this dog. He's going to be on the stomp next week to see what can be rescued. I'm with KGK, (just above) and would add another demand. This bill should FUND all of the issues it addresses. The FUNDING for the fence, border patrol, etc. should be IN THE BILL. Only then would I give it another look. We don't trust these guys and they can't believe it. They think we're just a bunch of natter, natter. They're wrong. I live in Arizona. I know what is happening to our emergency services, etc. The sad thing is how our Senators (McCain and Kyle) have let us down. I am not surprised that McCain is clueless, but I expected more of Kyle. |
|
|
All this bill represents is BOTH parties, having let the immigration problem mushroom for the last thirty years, trying to disguise their throwing up their hands and saying, "we quit," as a solution. |
|
|
Kill this bill now. Let the GOP finally wake up to its electoral as well as ability to protect our nation by putting forward an enforcement bill only with 5-6 points. Bring it up for a vote. Then immediately, bring forward a Part 2 bill which is so tightly structured on dealing with the 12-20 million, no chain migration, no ME immigrants(none), some visas for legal immigrants only and then tell the illegals they must stand in the back of the line. Then fine employers up the yin yang for hiring these illegals. Have a tamper proof card. Profile everyone coming into the nation, legal or not. And again, not one ME immigrant is to be allowed in until the Hispanic problem is dealt with. And English is a must for all immigrants. Every one of them. If the GOP can't do that, then just do Part 1 and enforce, build a wall, deport, police. I want it harsh and tough. I do not care one wit about the poor illegals or those creeping across the desert. Not one. And to boot, tell Mexico to deal with its gangs, illiteracy, poverty and we will buy its oil as the incentive. Tell them to shoot the coyotes on sight as well as the drug cartels. Then, then we will deal with these poor illegals. |
|
Gents,
As a doubter of Hugh's prior calls for compromise, I find myself (once again) out of step regarding our chances. The conventional wisdom I hear is that it has the 60 votes to pass the Senate, most likely intact.
And the House seems to bend to the will of Ms. Pelosi...
Is Hugh trying to encourage the Alamo defenders, in the face of a looming and likely disaster OR is it really heading downhill for the bill???????? |
|
Border security first, border security second, border security always. Then and only then can we address immigration reform.
However, since that won't happen with this Congress or perhaps the next other either, let's all us Anglos leave for Mexico.
Alternatively, for those Mexicans who claim that the "border crossed" them, ask them if they truly want to live in Mexico's economy or the USA's!
My guess is they don't want to live in Mexico's stagnant economy. Of course, if Hillary, Barack, or the Pink Sapphire gets elected, will any immigration bill matter since we'd all be living under Mexico's economy in a matter of a few months regardless?
|
|
I'll tell you what, I just might go for the bill if the politicians who vote for it do the following:
1. Agree that if the bill does not do as they have said (not what they intended), they have committed treason and will be sentenced to life in jail or death.
2. They agree to forfeit all of their wealth and that of their family members to the government to help pay for the bill's costs.
3. They will forfeit their pension plans and health benefits and have to join the rest of us in the Social Security and Medicare scams they created.
See if they're willing to put their money where their mouth's are given they love putting my money up.
|
|
The Freedom of Migration Act is the only solution to our immigration problem that makes sense. Read about it at http://www.henrykkowalczyk.com/immigration.htm .
See it at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i8xbHNCxoU
Tell me, what is wrong in the Freedom of Migration Act?
Yesterday, Bill O’Reilly said that we could not give amnesty to the presently illegal immigrants because, due to the family sponsored immigration, this would result in the additional 50 million of immigrants within the next several years. This way, indirectly Bill O’Reilly confirmed the main point of the Freedom of Migration Act, that family sponsored immigration is the original sin of our current immigration problem. Bill O’Reilly did not follow on this observation; his specialty is demagogy not critical thinking. However, the question remains: should we keep family sponsored immigration? And, a following question, should we kill every reasonable immigration reform proposal just to not touch a sacred cow of the family sponsored immigration?
|
|
"LibertarianHawk writes: Thursday, May, 31, 2007 10:07 PM
Frog, that's just flat wrong. Letting it die does not mean accepting the status quo."
I'll take a double helping of status quo over this pig! This is a bad bill which is being atempted to be rammed down our throats! |
|
Letting it die does not mean accepting the status quo.
The problem with the status quo is that our current laws are disregarded, not enforced, not abided, etc.
It seems to me that the government just needs to get serious about enforcing the laws it already has. Then, and only then, should we start talking about paths to citizenship, etc.
And those paths should involve more than simply paying a fine. |
|
Touche Quint
Just so I'm not acused of "not coming up with ideas", How's about lettingb those who benefit directly from slave labor wages "sponser" theier employees and foot the bill for all their service needs.
See I'm smart.....I can do things! |
|
This bill is fixable only if the politicians are serious about reforming illegal immigration. Every thing Hugh has mentioned is doable. The republicans would all vote for it and a minority of dems would cross over to carry the vote in the senate. It would pass the house with a very large majority as the blue dogs would all vote for it.
If this new bill gets shot down in the senate the house should attempt to craft their own bill. With the back taxes amendment already included the house is where the bill should originate to begin with.
As to the notion that the fence won't stop all illegals because half comes from expired visas--so what. Those people have to find employment. With this bill they won't be able to. Secondly that's also why the "touch back" provision should be in any bill. If those folks want their temp cards they have to get on a plane and fly out of here first--back to their country of origin. Once the sign up window expires they get the boot if they have not signed up and touched back. If this is a hardship, to bad.
We need a completed fence first with all other enforcement issues up and running. Then the rest of this pig might fly.
In the meantime we need all available national guard etc patrolling the border to stem the tidal wave that will coming. Anyone can fake the criteria to prove they were here before January 1, 2007 as it is written in the current bill. |
|
But the fix has to start with an uncoupling.
Uncouple the secure border provisions from the rest of the train. Bring it into the station and then later go back and get the other two cars: Legal immigration concerns and what to do with the illegals already here.
Otherwise, No. |
|
Article today in the LA times. Mexican consulates in the U.S. now have a program for referrals to U.S. hospitals. Health services to illegal immigrants in Los Angeles County cost the Medi-Cal program nearly $440 million in 2005, according to the California Department of Health Services. Statewide, that number was more than $1.1 billion last year.
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-me-health31may31,1,4173683.story?track=rss
I'm sick of hearing Hugh and others talk about our economy collapsing without high school drop out illegal aliens. When a nation gets to a point where leaders say we can not survive without importing high school dropouts, we are in deep trouble. We ARE collapsing as we pick up all the costs for the slave labor. Sure the home builders and restaurant owners and hotel corporations make out pretty well. They get slaves to work for them and I pay for the slaves health care, schooling, housing, and on and on and on.
|
|
|
stupidity. We now have a Government that knows no more about what the people actually want, than I know what the people of Brazil wants?..........They really don't see that we might actually know what is best for ourselves as well. And common sense has left, as a result of now having these second and third generation politicians!..............In reality, GWB knows about as much about real life in America as Paris Hilton!.........Is there any way to get normal people to get involved in politics?.........I would feel much safer if my mechanic or barber were in office. |
|
|
I'm criticizing Hugh here. He has contributed a ton to the efforts to kill this bill. But I've got a headache and we don't need another two-three weeks of this before it is ultimately killed in the House. Kill it now and start building the mandated wall and staffing the Border Patrol. Then crack down on sanctuary cities and deport the criminals first like Patterico is arguing for and when that is done, crack down on whatever criminal employers are too stupid to have noticed a shift in wind direction and persist in hiring the illegals who have not self-deported. My guess is the problem will be drastically smaller before the subject comes up again. If there is no progress after the bill is killed, 2008 will be a very ugly election for incumbents. |
|
"Letting it die is living with the status quo."
Interesting. And what is supposed to happen if it passes, in any form?
Aren't we supposed to have 700 miles of fence? Jorge Bush signed the bill himself.
Hugh's right about one thing: The base has left the building. Compromise will make sure they stay gone. It doesn't take courage to compromise in an attempt to make everything hunky-doory. It takes courage to be able to keep a stiff upper lip as we hear sob stories of the families being broken up as we deport millions of illegals.
boohoo. I thought that is why we elect Men to be president. Right about now we could use a cold, calculating b**ch like Hillary to do the job Bush doesn't have the balls to do.
|
|
I'm down for the fight in the war in Iraq. My support for this President ends there. I have been thrown under the bus by republicans for the last time.
Put me down in the "too ignorant to understand that it ain't amnesty" column! Of course it's not amnesty, after all, I mean were gonna make em pay a fine! Hot damn!
Funny thing is, since this last incarnation of the "anti-US-pariah, ani't really amnesty bill", somehow the MSN has been able to "flush actual illegals out from "the shadows" for interviews. What do they say?
"We don't mind paying the fines".
Sounds like equitable penance for violating our country's soveriegnty to me! Not amnesty my foot.
Except for the extremely rare principled exceptions in the party Republicans can go jump in the Rio Grande! |
|
I agree with your approach.
But I also want you to surrender your 2004 Arlen Spector for Judiciary Committee Chairman fan card too.
Then, all's forgiven for past Republicanism. |
|
...is living with the status quo.
Do people realize that even a perfect barrier on both the Canadian and Mexican borders would only solve about half the problem? Half of the foreign nationals illegally in the United States entered legally, but overstayed their visa--maybe by ten, or fifteen, or twenty years. They're certainly not any safer to have here than the border jumpers, and judging by history they're less safe to have here.
|
|
ENFORCE SIMPSON/MAZZOLI!!!
oh wait, Hugh wants a bill.
|
|
|
Necessary measures such as verifying actual border control and internal enforcement before granting any relief to illegal aliens would never be accepted by the Dems. Kill this turkey. |
|
Let it die. We need an overhaul of our immigration system. The problems with illegals are bad enough, but worse with legals.
See "Fixing Immigration" at commentarymagazine.com, for a detailed analysis of the problems and possible fixes. |
|
been thwarted. Let it die Hugh, or better yet, help us kill it - where is the stake to drive through the heart of the bill - amnesty? Comprehensive reform is easy - just do it in a logical order: 1. Secure the border while enforcing existing laws - More fence/border agents/surveilance devices, and find the employers that are hiring illegals and enforce the law. 2. Increase legal immigration from non terrorist nations but have a background check (a real one done before permission is granted to enter the country) - use american citizens as part of the process - just like security background checks use neighbors to see if you are ok. I would gladly give my (most likely illegal) maid a reference - she is certainly not a threat to this country. 3. Address the 12-20 million here - simple - see step 2 - go back to your country of origin and do it right under the new rules. Everyone here that is not a criminal and not a terrorist would find this easy to do and it would cost less than $5000 for most. Get 3-5 letters of references, apply for the guest visa and come back - if you are who you say you are and can provide a service we need you will be welcome here. 4. Citizen ship should be as difficult to get now as it always has been - and certainly you should not be rewarded with this wonderful gift if you don't respect the law and the culture. We are a melting pot nation, not a former territory to be annexed. If you want to speak another language without learning English, if you want Socialism, if you want political corruption and TV stations closed - stay were you are or go back where you come from. My ancestors came here from a poverty stricken nation and were considered stupid but hardworking. We spoke the language of this country and came here legally and now are accepted - you will be as well. |
|
|
|