Wednesday, May 07, 2008
|
|
Senator McCain, Unplugged
|
|
Posted by:
Hugh Hewitt at
2:46 PM
|
I taped an interview with Senator McCain earlier today. It will air in hours one and three of today's program.
|
|
We need Comprehensive Immigration Enforcement, not reform. We need to restore respect for the law and the faith of the American people that their government is not selling them out. Amnesty for the illegal aliens is also amnesty for the corrupt companies who have been employing them. Money trumps everything, including love of country. Multi-nationals have no loyalty to country by definition, they see us as a market, not a nation. They see people as workers, documented or undocumented, no difference. If they can't send the work to where the labor is cheaper, then they want to bring the cheap labor here. If citizenship becomes meaningless, this is no longer The United States of America.
If we love our Constitution and our representative Republic and we intend to keep it we must not surrender our sovereignty or abandon the rule of law. Profits must not supercede security. We should not create a new path to citizenship. We have a path to citizenship, more generous than any other country, illegal aliens have ignored it and bad choices do have consequences.
|
|
I agree we need comprehensive immigration enforcement (something both Pubs and Dems do not want to do).
We also need expanded legal immigration and a mechanism for gleaning those who it makes sense to allow to stay and those who need to leave (both voluntarily and through deportation).
You think immigration in small amounts is fine but do not want to expand it. You want illegal immigration to end.
I want illegal immigration to end, but I recognize immigration in itself is good provided it is with a goal of assimilation and citizenship. It also depends on the types of immigrants we are getting. A mass importation of Muslims would be a very bad idea, for example. |
|
|
Pretty words, but the reality is, thousands of US employers hire illegal immigrants BECAUSE IT WORKS OUT VERY WELL FOR THEM. Blame the workers if you want, but it is employers who have created the illegal immigrant problem. Why not fine them millions of dollars? The problem would end. But that won't do, because a hugely influential number of those employers are conservative Republicans, who cause the problem. |
|
|
Blame the employers who with cover from both Democrats and Republicans encourage illegal immigration. It is both parties who perpetuate this. That is why we need both comprehensive reform and enforcement. |
|
excuses are like?.......
Oh I know! |
|
McCain’s Justice Advisory Committee
John McCain has announced his Justice Advisory Committee and its full of a diverse set of high powered legal minds that will make both social and economic conservatives happy. Starting with Ted Olson and Sam Brownback as chairs. Scattered through the committee are a bunch of friends, including my old UIUC colleagues Gerard V. Bradley, a nationally leading expert on jurisprudence, and Ron Rotunda, one of the most prominent constitutional law scholars in the country, Rick Garnett of MirrorOfJustice.org, Orin S. Kerr and Eugene Volokh of The Volokh Conspiracy and, of course, in the latter case UCLAW. Kudos to all.
http://www.stephenbainbridge.com/punditry/comments/mccains_ justice_advisory_committee/
|
|
Reagan was asked what mistake botherd him most in the 8 years he was President. The questioner expected Lebanon to be the answer.. To the questioners dismay Reagan answer Amnesty was my most regretable mistake.
That amnesty was for 3 million Illegal Aliens and started the flood on Americans Southern Border. Now we sit at between 23 to 28 million Illegal Aliens causing 13 American Citizens deaths each day on average.
We snivel because Americans are not making their house payments and driving property values down. What is the answer from the RNC and DNC? Have those Blue Collar Workers compete with third world labor for Jobs.
There is no way to know the cost of Illegal Aliens. We know there are 300,000 anchor babies per year and 1 million Illegal Aliens crashing our border.
How do we know property damage caused to American Citizens by Illegal Aliens? I had a Lexus LS 400 hit twice by people who could not speak a lick of english for a total cost to my insurance company of $11,000.00 and my deductable charged to me was $1,000.00. This is not counted and I am one guy.
|
|
How do Republicans win elections? By being differant then Socialist (d) and having better ideas.
We were gifted wedge issues for this election cycle that could be used to show the American people why electing Republicans would be far better for America then electing Socialists.
The Problem is our guy is as bad as their guys are. If you take away taxes and Nuke Energy. Our guy is their guy!
Our President takes the blame for problems coused by allowing Hippies to run our energy policy because he is to busy fighting to the rights of Mexico to take back 4 Southern States.
If we Republicans were to take JFKs platform and run this election cycle on past Democrats ideas. That platform would be to conservative for our own nominee!
Pull a Torricelli NOW before it is to late to save this sinking ship.
|
|
Joe, I know you want to solve this problem, but it is economic, not political.
Hotrod, pathetic no nothing. Too bad about your Lexus, sue their employers. |
|
The primary responsibility of the U.S. government is to protect the territorial integrity and people of this country. They have completely abdicated this responsibility. Both parties have been complicit in this. We are being told it is not possible to control our borders, enforce our laws, and thereby control our destiny as a nation. Hogwash. We are being sold out by corporations intent on importing workers for jobs that can't be exported with the taxpayers paying the true costs, financial and human. If we act like sheep and don't stop the inundation across our borders, we will lose our country without a bleat. |
|
|
You know you wouldn't have to send everyone home on government money. All those who have committed a crime, including one of the worst crimes - and that's DUI, should be escorted out of our country, but it won't do any good until the wall is up and we are serious about entry. And don't tell me we are separating families, WE are NOT! They are! Besides their family should go back with them. All of these gang members in and out of jail who are illegals should be sent packing. When we get through with all that, then let's assess those who have never been arrested. The only problem is - they use so many identities who knows? |
|
Yes we can move twenty eight million illegal aliens back to Mexico by making them want to go back on their own. After all, Mexico did it!
1st. Any Corporation or Company who hires an Illegal Alien (notice I left out the word knowingly) shall face a fine of $250,000.00 per Illegal Alien hired and the CEO, CFO, Owner, and person who hired the Illegal Alien shall spend no less then three months in Jail. Time to be served in the County where the offence against the Legal Citizens of the USA occurred.
2nd.No person, Corporation, or non-profit group shall hire, rent or lease to, sell an automobile to, or pay money owed to any Illegal Alien. Each offence shall incur a penalty of no less then $250,000.00 dollars and three months in jail levied against the CEO, CFO, Owner, and or persons in the County where the offence against the Citizens of the USA occurred.
Should a CEO, CFO, Owner, or persons be in violation of the Solving the Illegal Alien Law have no ability to pay fines. Jail time will be extended accordingly and property sized. Bankrupt Laws shall not apply to any guilty party or entity due to failure to pay fines.
|
|
Send 'em all home? I don't think so. Find out where they work first, then fine their employers millions of dollars. It is a truth in modern history that populations move to find work.
|
|
Exactly right. We have no idea who they really are or how long they have been here or what crimes they have committed. We know they have all entered illegally, used fraudulent ID's, worked illegally, and many have done lots more. They put themselves in the position of being illegal aliens.
Do we not enforce other laws because we feel sorry for the criminal or his family? |
|
i read the topics about immigration. Diversity is a blessing. Please go to womancandidatemaster.blogspot.com and on the sidebar you are going to read what diveristy does and accomplishes in this country. This person is about to represent the USA next month. immigration does not weaken us, is strengthens us. Especially when EVERYONE is an immigrant, everyone.
Abed
womancandidatemaster.blogspot.com |
|
|
Why don't you propose your idea to any politician who will listen. The try to get a job anywhere in the USA ever again. |
|
McCain is a sycophant of the Left. He's in this to destroy the GOP for good.
Vote Ron Paul. |
|
|
I think we settled this one. |
|
...won't listen because they're first and only priority is to consolidate their own power. Until then, they'll continue to get away (with an able assist from the MSM) with portraying groups like the Minutemen and others who seek enforcement of our laws as some kind of wackos.
If they were to actually face consequences, like perhaps being voted out of office, then we may start seeing some results, but until elections are entirely on the up and up, you won't see it.... |
|
... will not be accomplished via the federal government. The way to curb illegal immigration is through state action. Consider: the only place where anti-illegal immigration measures are seriously discussed is the House. Why is that? Because Reps. represent smaller, local constituencies.
If you think about it, the states' handling the problem would be the most conservative approach. Oklahoma's started doing it, because they care about it; to the extent that other states come to care about it, also, they'll act.
I won't go into the nature of Hispanic voters and related matters. But I will say that alienating such a large, naturally conservative voting bloc, and blaming Sen. McCain for the problem that *no one* at the Federal level wants to touch, and threatening to sit on your hands in November, is not the answer.
Remember the old hippie bumper sticker, "Think Globally, Act Locally"? Well, logically it's spot on: thinking nationally means your heart's in the right place; acting at the state and local level means you're doing your part where you can to make a difference. |
|
|
For Pete's sake. No matter who is Prez, the Dems will still control Congress for years to come. To think that they will undermine their illegal voting machine is just nuts. Unless down ticket conservs are voted in by Pubs and Dems alike(like blue dogs like Schuler) there will not be this type of immigration reform we seek. It is Congress who sets the pace. If Obama wins, there will be less reform than there is now because Dems want those voters and sympathies. |
|
... will give you President Obama, and all of President Obama's judges, cabinet officers, etc. Foreign policies. Tax policies. Healthcare policies. And immigration policies.
President Obama will have both the House and the Senate to assist him in getting through all of the above.
After losing the presidency and more seats in the House and Senate, it will look like President Obama has a clear mandate to act decisively to resolve major issues that have been left unaddressed by the current president.
Passing blanket amnesty for 10+ million illegal aliens *will* resolve the illegal immigration situation -- at least as regards the current population of illegals. It won't resolve it to your liking, of course, but, then, since you stayed home in November, you won't have any grounds for complaining.
|
|
Stop trying to get McCain to keep his campaign promise of borders before CIR. He won't, and it's not worth trying to work with him to get him to.
MCCAIN IS THE ENEMY. |
|
... and letting him work to win a national election in a very difficult election year, and meanwhile working hard *yourself* at the state and local level to fine those who hire illegals in *your* town or city and state, well... that sounds like a plan to me.
Getting 75, 50, 25, or even 10% of what you want is a much better deal than getting 100% of what you don't want. |
|
... and letting him work to win a national election in a very difficult election year, and meanwhile working hard *yourself* at the state and local level to fine those who hire illegals in *your* town or city and state, well... that sounds like a plan to me.
Getting 75, 50, 25, or even 10% of what you want is a much better deal than getting 100% of what you don't want. |
|
|
I will be voting in November, I never miss. I will not be voting for McCain if he's still pushing amnesty. If he decides to represent American citizens, who want enforcement by about 70%, he may get my vote. If he continues pandering to illegal aliens, he will not. I would rather fight a President of the other party over the next amnesty. It's time for this issue to divide the Democrats. |
|
|
Point on. The guy is flawed and our GOP leadership is filled with wussie. Yet with all that, half a loaf is better than a Congress and Prez who are both socialist and pacifist in foreign policy . Take the time to support local House conservpubs. At least that will keep you from being overly pessimistic if the hurricane hits in Nov. Some seats will be very close with up to 30-5 seats maybe going Dem. Some of those seats were Pub seats so, a rally could save the disaster from growing larger. It depends on the area you live , of course. In Ca., where I reside, only socialists and pacifists seem to be gaining ground as illegals, non-producers and ones who want the womb to the tomb safety. There are fewer Pubs and with redistricting not a real possibility even with Arnold supporting it, we are in for a long season of disappointments. |
|
dogman writes: "Supporting McCain"
Virginia Patriot's approach is principled no doubt, but extremely wrongheaded and self defeating. seeking perfection is generally the enemy of the good.
If Obama wins he sill have coattails. if he has very long coattails, he may appoint two or three very liberal Supreme Court justices, thus locking in a liberal lean for a decade or perhaps two.
VP's principles will be intact, but the tattered Constitution will be in desperate peril.
|
|
"It's time for this issue to divide the Democrats."
Maybe you're right -- that would be nice, wouldn't it?
Though I don't think it will be so nice fighting them when they control the Presidency and both Houses of Congress, and I don't think they'll squirm over it nearly as much as you'd like to imagine: I think they'll play the race card, pass a gigantic amnesty and get it over with.
Also, I do believe McCain when he says he'll secure the border first. I think he's a man of his word, for one (say what you will about him, the concept of honor is not one he takes lightly), and, secondly, like you said, at least 70% of Americans want it.
Actually, I think McCain has it in him to be a great president -- a tax-cutter, a spending-slasher, conservative-judge-nominator, and, frankly, a unifier (let's face it, we could use a little less of the divisiveness that we've had the last six or seven years). Of course, I could be very wrong -- but I will do nothing that will possibly help give us an Obama Presidency.
|
|
"It's time for this issue to divide the Democrats."
Maybe you're right -- that would be nice, wouldn't it?
Though I don't think it will be so nice fighting them when they control the Presidency and both Houses of Congress, and I don't think they'll squirm over it nearly as much as you'd like to imagine: I think they'll play the race card, pass a gigantic amnesty and get it over with.
Also, I do believe McCain when he says he'll secure the border first. I think he's a man of his word, for one (say what you will about him, the concept of honor is not one he takes lightly), and, secondly, like you said, at least 70% of Americans want it.
Actually, I think McCain has it in him to be a great president -- a tax-cutter, a spending-slasher, conservative-judge-nominator, and, frankly, a unifier (let's face it, we could use a little less of the divisiveness that we've had the last six or seven years). Of course, I could be very wrong -- but I will do nothing that will possibly help give us an Obama Presidency.
|
|
Great Advice from Victor Davis Hanson:
I think in their depression, the Republicans fail to see that their problems were not in their principles, but rather in the sometimes sleezy and sloppy way they advanced them — and even more often in the manner that they abandoned them — and as a result, they are apparently eager to compromise on them.
To the degree McCain can articulate the above, he will win; to the degree that he either cannot or believes the latest gurus that he must abandon them, he will lose. Moving toward a lite version of the Obamian/European "bipartisan"and socialist view of government and calling it a new conservatism is a prescription for utter disaster.
No one can out-Obama Obama.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTdlNTIzZTI4NDMwYj cwZTIzZDkzMTMyNmE4YWEzYWE= |
|
|
I think McCain could take California -- now (putting losses in Congress aside, of course) wouldn't that be a kick in the pants. |
|
|
I think McCain could take California -- now (putting losses in Congress aside, of course) wouldn't that be a kick in the pants. |
|
|
McCain doesn't know how to read, ignorant fool. |
|
|
Yes, it's that time again -- the little guy is giving me the look. Nice chatting with y'all. Remember: the fight against illegal immigration starts at *your* town hall! McCain 08! |
|
|
|
... immigration. Such laws are completely inconsistent with the founding principles of this country -- namely, with the principle that ALL MEN are created equal and possess the same inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of their own happiness, by means of their own effort. ALL MEN, not just those born with a certain geographical territory.
That's why the Statue of Liberty stands at the entrance to New York harbor as a beacon to all who love liberty and want to live in -- and support -- freedom.
Conservative's intense desire to PUNISH and THWART those who seek to escape from socialist or theocratic hell-holes and build productive lives for themselves here in America is very, very sad indeed.
For the first 150 years of our country's existence, open immigration was the law of the land -- and we did NOT descend into a banana republic nor did anyone lose their "culture" nor did we become a lawless nation. To the contrary, we prospered immensely.
Government should screen immigrants to eliminate anyone who poses a physical threat to our rights, such as criminals, those with certain communicable diseases, etc. But except for those cases, nothing justifies the notion that the government may prevent me from hiring someone or renting them a room in my apartment building on the grounds that they were born in a different geographical location. Simply nothing.
Now go ahead and direct a stream of insults at me. Go ahead and call me “ignorant”, “stupid”, “moronic” or whatever. That’s your right. But when you can present a logical argument that justifies government violating my property rights by imposing arbitrary limits on who I may or may not deal with -- then I’ll engage you in a discussion. |
|
I have sent that Law to EVER Senator and Congressman I could. Some COWARDS like Palousy will not let you e-mail her unless you are in her district.
No takers yet. |
|
McCain is a candidate without a base. I'd rather vote for Obama than McCain.
Luckily we have Ron Paul to fight for us! |
|
|
Explain why Bob Barr is so much better on immigration than John McCain. You are only voting for Barr as a protest to McCain. |
|
who are even thinking of voting for McCain go here.
Immigration Gum Balls on UTUBE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7WJeqxuOfQ
Half a loaf or surrender? |
|
John McCain said:
As president, I will secure the border. I will restore the trust Americans should have in the basic competency of their government. A secure border is an essential element of our national security. Tight border security includes not just the entry and exit of people, but also the effective screening of cargo at our ports and other points of entry.
But a secure border will contribute to addressing our immigration problem most effectively if we also...
Recognize the importance of assimilation of our immigrant population, which includes learning English, American history and civics, and respecting the values of a democratic society.
Recognize that America will always be that "shining city upon a hill," a beacon of hope and opportunity for those seeking a better life built on hard work and optimism.
Border security and our failed immigration system are more examples of an ailing Washington culture in need of reform to regain the trust of Americans. In too many areas -- from immigration and pork barrel spending to Social Security, health care, energy security and tax relief -- business-as-usual politics prevents addressing the important challenges facing our nation.
http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/issues/68db8157-d301-4e 22-baf7-a70dd8416efa.htm
|
|
Joe,
McCain has been sleeping with Ted Kennedy since he got into that senate. That's why they cosponsor their amnesty bills together,. |
|
John McCain said:
As president, I will secure the border. I will restore the trust Americans should have in the basic competency of their government. A secure border is an essential element of our national security. Tight border security includes not just the entry and exit of people, but also the effective screening of cargo at our ports and other points of entry.
But a secure border will contribute to addressing our immigration problem most effectively if we also...
Recognize the importance of assimilation of our immigrant population, which includes learning English, American history and civics, and respecting the values of a democratic society.
Recognize that America will always be that "shining city upon a hill," a beacon of hope and opportunity for those seeking a better life built on hard work and optimism.
Border security and our failed immigration system are more examples of an ailing Washington culture in need of reform to regain the trust of Americans. In too many areas -- from immigration and pork barrel spending to Social Security, health care, energy security and tax relief -- business-as-usual politics prevents addressing the important challenges facing our nation.
http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/issues/68db8157-d301-4e 22-baf7-a70dd8416efa.htm
|
|
|
This election stopped being about principles and ideas when you RINOs rolled over to the liberals and allowed Democrats to nominate Shoeless Joe for GOP presidential candidate. So asking a dumb question like arguing that Barr is stronger on ILLEGAL immigration (paying attention Mike, your argument is absurd) than McCain is irrelevant. Barr is not only more conservative than McCain by a light years, he actually IS a conservative. This election was reduced to "electibility" last year and McCain is not electible so are you nose-holding RINOs now going to draft Hillary because she is the only one who can beat Obama? I have a better idea, Bob Barr is running, that fact alone will torpedo McCain's candidacy so why not vote for the lesser of THREE evils or as I see it, the ONLY conservative in the race? It might even save the GOP. It's called winning by losing, just like 1992. |
|
Joe is attacking me so viciously today, we have been mopping the floor with him all day on Hugh's original posting for today and he doesn't have the integrity, guts or firepower to take us on head to head so he runs away and throws bombs at me 'in absentia". Speaks volumes about his candidate.
Join us. Here is the link. It is where 99% of the discussion has been taking place at TH all day. Good fun if you're a conservative.
http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/blog/g/105fd481-9231-4d6a-be 3a-ba224ddd6c96&comments=true#commentAnchor
|
|
You earned the Kenesaw Mountain title by constantly calling McCain "Shoeless John." You are the guy quick to call people names. You are the guy who refuses to answer questions.
As for McCain's accomplishments getting a life time conservative voting record above 80 is an accomplishment. I am not a fan of McCain Feingold and I agree McCain Kennedy was fatally flawed. I have said this to you before but you have a habit of lying about what I say, misconstruing it, lying about me. But hey--I know you get fired up and lose it.
I know that Obama is a lot more liberal than McCain. I know McCain was a hero, is a patriot, and is mostly conservative. He is more right than wrong on most issues. I also recognize that McCain is far more likely to make better SCOTUS picks than a Barack Obama (and that alone would justify voting for him). I disagree with the plan of winning by losing that you propose.
So I will ask you again--who do you foresee saving conservatism in four years (after President Barack Obama's first term)? Do you have a person in mind for that? If you do, why are you afraid to say it? |
|
I agree with him on civil liberties. And his views on illegal immigration are essentially the same as John McCain's. I wish there were more Bob Barrs in congress. But he is a congressman who failed to get elected in his own home district.
He is your savior? Granted if your goal is not to vote for McCain on principal and he is a better choice than Ron Paul, fair enough. But it is a protest vote nevertheless. |
|
I'm going to have to side w/Joe -- as won't surprise you if you've read my prior posts. Look, Phil, I do respect your right to vote as you please, but here is my problem, generally speaking, with your attitude re McCain: I am not a RINO. I'm very conservative, and I voted for McCain for various reasons, among them his electibility in a difficult year. But I am not a "McCainiac" by any means -- I really disliked Romney, but I'd have voted for him had he won the nomination. I'd have voted for any of the Republican candidates who won the nomination. I wasn't just thinking, "it's my guy, or I'm outta here."
Now, I know you don't feel that sums up your position -- and I'll grant you that your intentions are upright. But I do think you are wrong if you think that an Obama Presidency with a Democrat-controlled congress will be "winning by losing". It will just be losing: two or three SCOTUS appointments, countless appointments to the lower courts, and possibly even losing in Iraq. It will mean elevating Iran, and it will, indeed, mean sitting on the sidelines while our country's illegal immigration problem is addressed.
For any of you who don't think the illegal immigration problem won't be addressed, think again -- it will be, and it will represent the worst sort of vote-pandering, short-sighted sweep of the pen you ever saw.
If you withhold your vote from McCain come November and he loses, we will see the above scenario play out at least because, after the democratic primary process was over, you took your ball and went home.
|
|
|
Who was the "savior" in 1992? How on earth did conservatives orchestrate the Republican majorities in 1994? Why didn't the GOP learn anything from that by 1996? Sometimes you have to create the opportunity first. Unlike you, I'm not a sheep who will follow the herd off the cliff unless a shepherd shows up to guide me away from it. I see the cliff and see who is doing the shepherding. Someone will show up. Until then, screw the GOP. |
|
I'm going to have to side w/Joe -- as won't surprise you if you've read my prior posts. Look, Phil, I do respect your right to vote as you please, but here is my problem, generally speaking, with your attitude re McCain: I am not a RINO. I'm very conservative, and I voted for McCain for various reasons, among them his electibility in a difficult year. But I am not a "McCainiac" by any means -- I really disliked Romney, but I'd have voted for him had he won the nomination. I'd have voted for any of the Republican candidates who won the nomination. I wasn't just thinking, "it's my guy, or I'm outta here."
Now, I know you don't feel that sums up your position -- and I'll grant you that your intentions are upright. But I do think you are wrong if you think that an Obama Presidency with a Democrat-controlled congress will be "winning by losing". It will just be losing: two or three SCOTUS appointments, countless appointments to the lower courts, and possibly even losing in Iraq. It will mean elevating Iran, and it will, indeed, mean sitting on the sidelines while our country's illegal immigration problem is addressed.
For any of you who don't think the illegal immigration problem won't be addressed, think again -- it will be, and it will represent the worst sort of vote-pandering, short-sighted sweep of the pen you ever saw.
If you withhold your vote from McCain come November and he loses, we will see the above scenario play out at least because, after the democratic primary process was over, you took your ball and went home.
|
|
I meant "at least IN PART because, after the democratic primary process was over, you took your ball and went home.
|
|
|
|
|
Another thing -- I've said before, I used to be furious over the illegal immigration situation. While I still am angry about it, I have realized that the way this is going to be handled is by the states -- like in Oklahoma. Like in the recent crop of Voter ID laws that have been passing all over the country. In a way, conservatives are acting in a very whiny, unrealistic way about the whole subject: we all agree, all the time, how the federal government can't handle anything. We saw how Katrina was handled, for example, as not just the Bush Admin.'s screwing up, but as a portrait of the triumph vs. the failure of local government: LA vs. Mississippi. One governor broke down in tears and wrung her hands. And where is she today? And one governor said, "I'll handle this", and handled it -- and where is he today, and what are they saying about him? |
|
|
|
"Another thing -- I've said before, I used to be furious over the illegal immigration situation. While I still am angry about it, I have realized that the way this is going to be handled is by the states -- like in Oklahoma."
Precisely. And consider all the implications of this most sagacious insight of yours. Implications for the concept of federalism, now dead but begging to be resurrected. Implications for the future of Rome on the Potomac, that political and cultural cesspool so beloved of liberals and neocons. Implications for damnable neoconservative media of all kinds, this site included.
Ad fontes. |
|
For years now, I've been asking myself, how is it possible that 70-80% of the country is angry about nonstop illegal immigration, yet nothing is ever done about it?
The answer is that being angry and doing nothing is the same as not caring and doing nothing.
Illegal immigration will be addressed, or left unaddressed, at the state and local levels. Think about it: *cities* enact so-called "sanctuary" policies re illegals. The mayor of San Francisco thumps his chest, declares he'll protect illegals, etc., and his constituency obviously thinks this is good, he's a wonderful humanitarian standing up against the evil, racist GOP. The GOP, meanwhile, gets tarred with this unfair brush, yet the policy in SF doesn't change. After all, what is the federal gov't supposed to do? Invade SF and start laying down the law? Keep dreaming -- and in fact, if that did happen, it would be a PR nightmare for sane immigration policy.
Illegal immigration in SF will be tolerated by liberals there until they reach a tipping point -- middle-class locals start leaving in droves because the schools go to hell; gangs move in and commit grisly murders; insane taxes force businesses out -- in short, when the quality of life begins to be negatively affected by their current policies, they will change those policies.
Meanwhile, how many conservatives are involved with their local governments? If you are, good. If illegal immigration is causing problems in your area, you should confront those problems there. My guess is that if you're seeing problems in your town or city, you aren't the only one seeing them -- and that is exactly when things get done, laws change, and politicians get voted into or out of office. |
|
For years now, I've been asking myself, how is it possible that 70-80% of the country is angry about nonstop illegal immigration, yet nothing is ever done about it?
The answer is that being angry and doing nothing is the same as not caring and doing nothing.
Illegal immigration will be addressed, or left unaddressed, at the state and local levels. Think about it: *cities* enact so-called "sanctuary" policies re illegals. The mayor of San Francisco thumps his chest, declares he'll protect illegals, etc., and his constituency obviously thinks this is good, he's a wonderful humanitarian standing up against the evil, racist GOP. The GOP, meanwhile, gets tarred with this unfair brush, yet the policy in SF doesn't change. After all, what is the federal gov't supposed to do? Invade SF and start laying down the law? Keep dreaming -- and in fact, if that did happen, it would be a PR nightmare for sane immigration policy.
Illegal immigration in SF will be tolerated by liberals there until they reach a tipping point -- middle-class locals start leaving in droves because the schools go to hell; gangs move in and commit grisly murders; insane taxes force businesses out -- in short, when the quality of life begins to be negatively affected by their current policies, they will change those policies.
Meanwhile, how many conservatives are involved with their local governments? If you are, good. If illegal immigration is causing problems in your area, you should confront those problems there. My guess is that if you're seeing problems in your town or city, you aren't the only one seeing them -- and that is exactly when things get done, laws change, and politicians get voted into or out of office. |
|
to expect the federal government to do something about illegal immigration, when all the federal government has done is fail us on this issue, for almost 8 years running now.
Consider: we controlled the House, the Senate, and the White House. 70-80% of Americans want illegal immigration curbed -- and WE, Republicans, did not deliver at the national level.
Question: What political philosophy continually looks to big, centralized government to solve its problems, even though big, centralized government has never, EVER done anything to solve such problems in the past, but, in fact, usually makes them even worse?
|
|
|
|
|
You are reading the political landscape far too superficially. If Joe had gotten his way in 1992, we would never have gotten a Republican majority ANYWHERE in 1992 and afterwards. Try to dig beneath the surface. You give politicians far too much credit and are overestimating the power of presidents. The Dems regained control of Congress in 2006 by running authentic conservative candidates, several who switched parties to run Democrat. I will gladly go back to the Democratic majorities we had in the 1980s in it means the Reagan coalition is in place. It is. It's just that the Dems are just more flexible about conservatives than the GOP. If you don't believe me, spend a few hours researching the Democratic Leadership Council. The Dems learned bitter lessons after Reagan and especially after 1994. The GOP could use a DLC of their own at this point but the only time political parties learn anything is after they lose elections in catastrophic ways. We need to have that catastrophe THIS YEAR. Trust me, we'll be fine. Obama will be facing a conservative Congress just like BJ Clinton did. And a DLC-led Democratic party will not make the mistake BJ Clinton made in 1992 by reading a GOP loss as a mandate. If you have the good sense to be counted in the denominator but vote 3rd party, you are denying the winner that mandate and so denying him/her the power to do what you fear. McCain WILL do exactly the same as Obama and the Joes of the world will then argue that it would have been EVEN WORSE if we had elected Obama. What will you do then? The time is now! Let's do the right thing like we did in 1992. It worked then and will work this time too. |
|
|
You are more Losertarian than Conservative. |
|
It seems to be a bad habit of many RINOs here at TH to toss gratuitous accusations at Hugh questioning his conservatism and/or calling him a phony and hypocrite for shilling for Romney and now soldiering for McCain. Let me say this about that.
From the beginning, Hugh was very clear about his being a right-of-center conservative who doesn't share the passion many of us feel about big hot button issues like illegal immigration. Yet, he was pivotal in getting the McCain-Kennedy-Bush amnesty bill killed. He's a good Republican soldier.
He has also made it clear during his campaign for Romney that he has a personal distaste for McCain for being a great American, lousy Senator and horrible Republican but if he gets the nomination, he will be doing his duty as a loyal Republican by enthusiastically supporting McCain.
I have my own problems with that but Hugh has his reasons. He is a loyal Republican and who am I to question his motives? But it is completely dishonest to call him a phony and hypocrite or question the purity of his motives. He has been very open about where he stands at all times and about what he will do if such and such happens.
It is very annoying to keep reading those comments and wish you guys would stop. It is hard enough to have rational discussions here as it is between the bigotry, lies and personal insults.
Your party is in deep trouble and may be fighting for its very survival. If we can't have rational discussions about the state of the Republican party on a Republican blog, where else can we have one? Personally, I don't care about Republicans. I care about my conservative issues and will craft my positions and arguments to advance them... just as Hugh uses his skills and influence to further the fortunes of the GOP. Try to respect that. |
|
You make a good argument, Phil -- you're obviously very informed re politics. Better informed, I'm sure, than I am. Still, my gut tells me that McCain will not do exactly the same as Obama, as you say. Certainly he won't on the war, judges, spending, and taxes. Those four alone are huge.
By the way, if you're all right with conservative Democrats (as I am), and assuming McCain is more like them than a thoroughgoing conservative (I don't believe he is, but let's just say), why not go with him over Obama? I mean, frankly speaking, I'd sleep fine with Zell Miller in the White House, wouldn't you? If the worry is about continuing damage to the Republican brand, perhaps you might consider the proposition that GWB has done quite a bit of that himself, what with his reckless spending. And in any case, I don't think we need to worry about getting cocky if McCain wins -- unless Obama makes some more really bad stumbles, I expect the general to be a squeaker, AND we're going to lose more seats in congress. With McCain in the White House, curbing spending, cutting taxes, and working with that conservative Democrat Congress, Republicans in Congress and across the country would have just the right balance, I think, of bitter lessons, and of thankfulness that, for all his flaws, we've got lower taxes, fiscal restraint, good judges, and a real wartime leader in John McCain.
Perhaps you are right, and a 100% thumping of the GOP, and the attendant three more Justice Ginsbergs, higher taxes and expanded social programs would be the best thing for us -- but I just don't see it that way. |
|
|
Who is this savior you speak of? Who will save the conservative movement? You never answer that question. Why? |
|
The quote you provided is remotely, very remotely, similar to what TR said.
I noticed the complete lack of any mention of enforcement. The failure of govenment has been as much a failure of enforcement as border security. Had the enforcement that was promised following the 1986 amnesty, we wouldn't have 20-30 million illegal aliens. Laws that are not enforced are worthless.
It is the jobs magnet that draws illegal aliens that needs to be turned off by prosecuting employers. Social Security cards could be replaced with a card like a credit card that could be swiped by employers to immediately verify employment verification. It's not hard to solve this, but there are too many people who do not want the cheap labor express shut down. Both parties have their own reasons for wanting it to continue, the citizens be damned. |
|
|
When you say "your gut", that is an uninformed, emotional reaction. There is no evidence whatsoever that McCain is more serious on taxes, war judges or anything else. On judges, Alito and Roberts ruled against his McCain-Feingold bill which he still defends and he once stated that Alito is "too conservative". All three candidates are offering the same plan on Iraq only framing their presentations to pander to their particular political audiences. McCain NEVER EVER engaged in any serious spending control strategies other than talk. He could have revived Willian Proxmire's "Golden Fleece" award for a start. Chasing OBL "to the gates of hell" is a nice phrase but what does it mean? OBL is no longer important and everyone knows it. Even the very existence of OBL's Al Qaeda is doubtful. Believe me, once the election is over, whichever is elected, we will start pulling troops out of Iraq and going to plan B. Hillary is the most likely to attack Iran. You have to accept the fact that Congressional Republicans are losing because of the wrong-headedness of the national party that seems hell-bent on destroying the party from above. Support your local conservative Republican Congressman and help him out by voting Barr to sweep out this corrupt party leadership. Read the Politico story I linked to and think about it. Stop buying into the emotional message about character and experience. McCain is the worst of the three and strategically, Republicans AND conservatives are better off with a conservative Congress tackling a Democratic liberal as president. We are only 2 years away from relief if we do this right. |
|
|
Who was the savior in 1992 when we defeated Bush? Do you think we would have had Republican majorities in 1994 had Bush won? Your question is obtuse. |
|
|
There will not be 3 more Ginsburgs. At worse, 2 SC judges (both being the most liberal current sitting) will retire to be replaced with judges that will not be as liberal. At worst, it is a wash. The same could happen under McCain. If we send a crushing defeat to the GOP in November, the Dems will understand too. They blew it in 1992 in victory. If they blow it again this year, they will lose again in 2010 and they know it. That is why Pelosi gained nothing by winning in 2006. The Blue Dogs were doing the job Republicans refused to do. Expect more of the same this November as Rahm Emanuel continues to recruit conservatives, frequently Republicans crossing over, to run against wobbly-kneed Republicans. It's about conservatives winning, not Republicans. Once you grasp that, you will see that we are winning. Don't rest your emotions on the GOP. You are only setting yourself up for feeling disappointed when you will be happy if you think like a conservative. We won in November 2006 and will win again this November. We'll be fine with President Obama. Let's give it a try. We did fine with BJ Clinton. This is a great country. |
|
(I have a Golden Retriever)
Some localities that have tried to take action against illegals have been sued into submission by The Race (LaRaza in Spanish), MALDEF, et al. Their argument is that states and localities have no right or role to enforce immigration laws. It IS a federal responsibility. Citizenship and the path to it is rightly a federal responsibilty. The removal of criminal illegal aliens must be done by the federal government.
There is certainly more that can be done on a local level to encourage illegal aliens to go home. We should make it easier for localities to enact and enforce requirements for proof of citizenship for jobs, apts, bank accounts, etc. Make it difficult to BE an illegal alien.
The Gov. of VA will not lift a finger to do anything using the excuse that it is a federal responsibilty. There is in fact a clause in the 1986 Simpson-Mazzoli law that prevents VA from enforcing some parts of VA employment law regarding illegal aliens. |
|
It is indeed supposed to be the federal government's responsibility to enforce immigration laws -- but they don't enforce it, and they're not going to. I'm aware of the efforts of La Raza and others like them -- but I am also aware of groups such as the Mountain States Legal Fund, which fight the good fight.
Oklahoma has of late enacted tough legislation against illegal aliens and those who employ them -- and illegal aliens are leaving. The open borders crowd is fighting them in court, but I doubt they'll lose over the long haul. In addition to the Oklahoma example, voter ID laws have passed in a number of states, and the SC just struck down the latest challenge to such a law.
The lesson, it seems to me, is simple: don't wait around for the federal government to do its job. Local action works, when the locals take action. Unfortunately, although most of the locals are against illegal immigration, they don't seem to be one for local action. That is why what's happening in Oklahoma is so uplifting to hear about -- everywhere else you look, people just complain and cry for Uncle Sam to do the job that, if they thought about it realistically, they would realize he has no wish to do nor intention of doing.
I think McCain will work to secure the border as he has promised. But the fact is, unless local governments (states, big cities and counties) start passing laws against hiring illegal aliens, we are going to get some kind of path-to-citizenship bill for the illegals we have now after the next election. |
|
You could be right about gut feelings -- but there is no question that often such feelings are right.
As for your suggesting that I think like a conservative as opposed to a Republican, I do. And I agree, 2006 was a good thing -- the GOP got what they deserved, and hopefully they will learn from it.
That said, thinking with my gut and thinking like a conservative, I still believe McCain is a far better choice for our country than Obama or Clinton. Quite frankly, I can't believe such a man as Obama could be our president, and I will do everything I can to keep that from happening. |
|
You could be right about gut feelings -- but there is no question that often such feelings are right.
As for your suggesting that I think like a conservative as opposed to a Republican, I do. And I agree, 2006 was a good thing -- the GOP got what they deserved, and hopefully they will learn from it.
That said, thinking with my gut and thinking like a conservative, I still believe McCain is a far better choice for our country than Obama or Clinton. Quite frankly, I can't believe such a man as Obama could be our president, and I will do everything I can to keep that from happening. |
|
The problem is that without the federal government cracking down on sanctuary cities and controlling the borders, there is no other authority to appeal to. Here in LA, Mayor Tony V has formally protested against ICE raiding employers who hire illegals. He was interviewed about it Monday my CNN where he stated that instead of harassing law-abiding employers (seriously), the feds should concentrate on those who abuse employees. The reporter asked him if that wasnt' exactly what they were doing? When he said it wasn't he was asked if he had any evidence. He sputtered that "of course I don't have any evidence. I don't need any evidence. We have allegations."
Here is a CNN video that gives you an idea of what we are up against. Those "immigration" marches were very small and require special camera angles to look like they are a crowd. Watch the whole thing. The quote above is near the end. What are we supposed to do? His position is very unpopular among the Mexicans themselves but particularly in the black neighborhoods where latino gangs are targeting blacks for ethnic cleansing. This is clearly a federal issue every bit as much as the violation of black voting rights and rights to an equal education were in Arkansas in the 1950's when Ike sent in the troops.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYeuf0yuXUM
|
|
Yes, it is. But they will vote for Obama. If Pat Buchanan was running, they'd vote for Obama. Democrats have run the wonderful inner cities where blacks live forever, and blacks will continue to vote for the Democrats.
I've long scratched my head at the situation -- everybody wanting illegal immigration curbed, ended, whatever, but nothing is done. Or next to nothing. Not by the federal gov't.
In San Diego some years back, the local gov't. built a big border fence. It worked. Illegal traffic shifted elsewhere.
The question is, why did those in power in San Diego build the fence?
Enough people were bothered by the trouble caused by illegal aliens flooding their city.
When people in L.A. start caring about illegal immigration, and start doing something about it -- getting petitions going, starting letter drives, running candidates, etc. -- then something will happen, and a man like Tony V will get his clock cleaned in an election.
Obviously, not enough people care, and Tony V thinks it more in his own, personal interest to serve the interests of open borders crowd -- and the fact is, he's probably right: the open borders crowd are vocal, and politically active; the other side listen to talk radio and rant at the kitchen table to their families. Thus, we have Tony V, and American Flags pulled down and replaced with Mexican flags. |
|
Yes, it is. But they will vote for Obama. If Pat Buchanan was running, they'd vote for Obama. Democrats have run the wonderful inner cities where blacks live forever, and blacks will continue to vote for the Democrats.
I've long scratched my head at the situation -- everybody wanting illegal immigration curbed, ended, whatever, but nothing is done. Or next to nothing. Not by the federal gov't.
In San Diego some years back, the local gov't. built a big border fence. It worked. Illegal traffic shifted elsewhere.
The question is, why did those in power in San Diego build the fence?
Enough people were bothered by the trouble caused by illegal aliens flooding their city.
When people in L.A. start caring about illegal immigration, and start doing something about it -- getting petitions going, starting letter drives, running candidates, etc. -- then something will happen, and a man like Tony V will get his clock cleaned in an election.
Obviously, not enough people care, and Tony V thinks it more in his own, personal interest to serve the interests of open borders crowd -- and the fact is, he's probably right: the open borders crowd are vocal, and politically active; the other side listen to talk radio and rant at the kitchen table to their families. Thus, we have Tony V, and American Flags pulled down and replaced with Mexican flags. |
|
Here's another one: in a press conference about a month ago, Mayor Villaraigrossa argued against exempting gang-bangers from special order 40 because that would "hurt the economy". The 18th Street gang is comprised 80% of illegal immigrants. The average among the gangs (think terrorists) is around 60-70%).
Earlier this week, City Councilwoman Janice Hahn, daughter of long-time mayor Ken Hahn and sister of former mayor James Hahn, was accused by police of protecting gang-bangers on the run from police in her office.
Monday, the LA City Attorney's office threatened Jamiel Shaw Sr. (father of Jamiel Shaw Jr. who died by targeted assassinated by an illegal alien gang-banger, and husband of active soldier serving in Iraq) that if he doesn't stop pushing for a new law to remove special order 40 in cases of illegal alien criminals, his office will take the position that his son was a gang member. This is the attorney who is prosecuting the murderer of his son. That attorney was removed yesterday by County Atty Cooley after the public uproar it caused. This will eventually become a national story. It is just awful.
All of these things are examples of how a corrupt one-party system that is rapidly falling under the control of criminal elements cannot be corrected without the feds stepping in. LA is rapidly turning into Tijuana. It is the same crowd working both places. McCain and his ilk are allowing it to happen whether you like it or not. What does your gut say about that? |
|
Even here, now -- look at us. I bet we've all been talking in a similar vein for years now. I don't know about you all, but what's changed about me is I'm no longer boiling mad about it. It just is. For the most part, I agree with Tom Tancredo. I also agree with David Horowitz on the left's influence on the press, academia, etc. in this country. But not many else do. Horowitz is considered a crank, major newspapers ignore his books, while Tom Hayden or Bill Ayers or whoever gets all the reviews they want and we, the great unwashed public, are all urged to allow for a reasonable context for "God Damn America".
|
|
He's MeCha, La Raza and a former gang-banger who protects gangs. He is as dirty as they come. You are just analyzing the whole election on personalities and images on an emotional basis. This election is about numbers and mandates. It is essential that the GOP lose big in the national election but win big in conservative races for Congress. McCain MUST lose. This is not 1992 where the stakes were minor.
And that San Diego fence was funded by federal dollars because Duncan Hunter has clout in Congress. You are just wrong about local will. The will is there but it will take an armed insurrection to oust this government and we are getting to that point. And it is heading your way. |
|
My gut? My gut says that we are living in the Twilight Zone.
Besides that, it says that cities and other localities are going to have to get pissed off enough to act about this. Realistically, anyway, think about it -- it's sort of ridiculous, the idea that John McCain (or any other candidate) has to be thinking about every murder in every city, while the local pols and the public they serve do nothing to fix their own problems.
I feel sorry for Mr. Shaw -- if we were a healthy society, with self-respect and a proper survival instinct, his son would never have been murdered. The murderers would not have been here -- they would not have existed in these States to commit any kind of crime, from selling drugs to murder. |
|
|
becomes a major story, good. But I don't think it will. Look, we've had a war on our border for years now -- Mexican military incursions running drugs, people, weapons. You name it. It's an amazingly well-kept secret, because the press doesn't report it. Just like they never took pictures of all the Che and Fidel posters, etc., at those illegal immigrant rallies. |
|
... is not that the GOP lose big; it's that all of the enablers of illegal immigration and so on lose big. But, since all of them cannot lose, I will go with the one who I trust on other issues.
The GOP in the House have been trying to address the illegal alien issue forever -- you know that. No Democrats will touch this. To say that the GOP alone must take a beating for this issue to gain traction is, I think, incorrect.
What needs to happen is America needs to reach a tipping point. However, the odds of our hitting such a point before it is too late are slim to none. |
|
and others like them are bleeding money and readers every day. But I still don't think anything is going to happen re illegal immigration -- at least, the right thing won't happen.
Anyhow, the left is very vocal -- and they would gladly import all of South America tomorrow if they could, to dilute the vote down to nothing.
It's hard for me to understand the mind of those on the left -- I mean, I know them, I hear what they say, I read what they write, but to me they sound like they're from a different planet.
|
|
...and very appreciated. Thank you to, dogman, P-Phil, V-Pat, Rich and others.
While living in southern Cal I made multiple efforts to fight against the prevailing apathy which existed in LA County. I made many attempts to derail those local politicians who supported illegal immigration, and the Liberal government all too present.
The only thing I did not do was take the Bill Ayers approach and "bomb" those symbols of aforementioned institutions I had contempt for.
I use the term "apathy" very specifically. There will always be a vocal minority. In the case of Los Angeles, the vocal minority was given every opportunity to further their agenda, their causes, their hatred towards America.
Antonio Villaraigosa is a dangerous and vile punk and represents the will of the minority---and the inaction (read: apathy) of the larger citizenry in Los Angeles County.
Keeping their cars freshly washed and waxed was far more priority of Angelenos than the fighting of conservative principles.
Another sanctuary city is Los Angeles.
A pathetic representation of Leftism and Liberalism operating virtually unchallenged.
And the state of California silently sleeps.
Tom McClintock offered practical ideas in a state which knows only defeat to the counter forces eating away from the inside.
It is the perfect place for those pathetic liberals residing there. |
|
I completely agree with you when you say:
It is the jobs magnet that draws illegal aliens that needs to be turned off by prosecuting employers. Social Security cards could be replaced with a card like a credit card that could be swiped by employers to immediately verify employment verification. It's not hard to solve this, but there are too many people who do not want the cheap labor express shut down. Both parties have their own reasons for wanting it to continue, the citizens be damned.
I also noticed Pasadena "Kenesaw Mountain" Phil either does not have a candidate in mind or he is not talking (afraid his preference will disclose where his sympathies really lie). |
|
Those of us on the Right who bash McCain do so because the guy has done every thing he could think of to kill our party.
G. Bush put Martinez as head of the RNC and cost us the 06 election cycle.
I will vote Republican down the ticket even though I am looking for a new political home. I will NOT vote for McCain period. I voted for Bush I, Dole, Bush II and now I have had enough. Let the RINOs vote for the best they can get for a change.
As I have posted before. The RNC can not run on wedge issues because they put a democrat in as nominee. The RNC can not take JFKs platform because the RNC is to far to the left side of the Democrat JFK.
The RNC has taken Conservatives for granted every bit as much as the DNC have taken the Black Folks for granted. I am off of the RNC plantation now and they can go pound sand. |
|
If you had any intellectual integrity, you would deal with what people actually say and acknowledge that you understand what they mean, especially when that person has attempted to clarify his meaning to you. The reason your only audience here is with the nose-holding myrmidons is because there is not thinking involved when your voting process is reduced to see "R", place checkmark.
You are not only dishonest but cowardly and I believe you are on the McCain payroll. |
|
ICE made a raid on a construction site in Richmond yesterday, netted 50 illegal aliens. (I hope my weekly pounding on my Congressman had something to do with it) The kicker is the building is a new FEDERAL COURTHOUSE!
Of course, there are 100 times that many illegal aliens working construction in Richmond. I could take them around to 50 other places where they could round up many, many more.
It's window dressing. Until just before the '06 election, there was NO enforcement. |
|
The kicker is the building is a new FEDERAL COURTHOUSE!
In California. That would be a prevailing wage job. I guess Americans will not do those any more?
Gezzzzz. |
|
All the Above reasons the conservatives will cross over
and voting for
Senator John McCain,
Because, when you look at the United States' Flag,
The Symbol of American Pride and Justice,
McCain like a loving father will protect that baby
Obama, the liberal Democrat, looks to the American Flag as a symbol of fascism and Imperialism,
then, on the other hand
as a liberal Obama would do
will look at that Flag as a burden
will not want to be burdened
with that baby.
Now, my conservative friend
Vote for that Baby
Our Pride our Joy
Do not let any one
Step on our Baby
on our Joy
Vote for
the American Baby |
|
|
|