|
If these were the finalists for the Republican nominee in '08, which one would you choose?
|
||||||||||||
Posted on 04/10/2006 9:57:19 AM PDT by FerdieMurphy
In recent days I have noted several polls, many on the Internet, dealing with the illegal immigrant problem. In just about all cases these polls have been lopsidedly in favor of cracking down on illegal immigration and have voice approval for putting up that wall along our southern border at specific places where the illegals seem to cross over in great numbers.
Now, just before Congress was to vote on legislation dealing with the illegals, lo and behold, out comes yet another poll, and guess what, this one shows that over 50% of Americans are in favor of letting the illegals remain--after all, its the only "humanitarian" thing to do, isn't it?
With all those polls out there floating around in favor of shipping these lawbreakers back to their own countries, guess which poll congress will end up paying attention to? Do you need three guesses?
And now, according to some sources, it turns out that the congressional pushers of lawbreaker amnesty don't have quite enough votes to push their program through, and so some of them are attempting what they call a "fallback position." This would amount to letting the illegals who have been here the longest stay on and try for citizenship, but would send back across the border those who have not spent as much time here. In other words, allow those breaking our immigration laws the longest to stay here as a reward for their lawbreaking and ship back to Mexico, or wherever, those who have only broken the law for a shorter period. If some of these illegals have been here for over ten years, what makes Congress think they will sudeenly line up now and all apply for citizenship? Too much time in Washigton seems to weaken the reasoning ability--a great reason for considering term limits!
One of the usual Leftist propaganda ploys that has made the rounds is that the illegals are only here to do the jobs us lazy Americans don't want to do. So what happens, then, if some of them do end up becoming U.S. citizens. Will they, at that point, suddenly decide that now that they are citizens they don't want to bother doing those jobs anymore and therefore try to send for all their illegal relatives so they can come up and take them over?
Columnist Cal Thomas, who I don't always agree with, had a recent column on the demonstrations made by the illegals in some cities in recent days, and in this instance, I fully agree with him. Thomas noted one newspaper headline which read "Thousands rally for immigrants' rights." Then Thomas asked "What rights? If they are here illegally they have the right to leave. They have no rights under our Constitution anymore than I might expect the rights of a Mexican citizen should I choose to live illegally in Mexico."
Thomas continued: "Under no circumstances should there be amnesty for illegals by whatever name politicians wish to call it...Too many politicians appear ready to sell the security of their country for the votes of illegals and their supporters...Illegal immigration along with national security, which are related, should be the top issues in the 2006 and especially the 2008 elections (provided the debates on these issues are carried on in English).
It remains to be seen whether Congress will have the intestinal fortitude (guts) to do the right thing. Personally, I doubt it. They will obfuscate, waffle, and play rhetorical games while trying to find some way to let the illegals stay (while covertly encouraging the to continue to bring in their friends and relations so they can vote for them too).
If we are going to continue to reward these illegal aliens for their lawbreaking, then why do we bother to punish bank robbers and others for illegal activities? Why not give them all pardons, especially if they have been at their "trade" for a long time? Bank robbers are, after all, only redistributing the wealth, taking it from the "haves" (honest citizens) and redistributing it to the "have nots" (themselves). It's a program Karl Marx would have loved! Sound absurd? Maybe, but you can bet that if this country continues to find ways to avoid punishing illegal aliens, that somewhere down the road, some smart shyster lawyer will find an angle that might apply to one of his clients whose "rights" have been violated because he was imprisoned for robbery or some such thing. Refusing to enforce the law in one critical area inevitably will lead to a breakdown in other areas, given enough time. We are "Sowing the wind" with these illegals and it would seem that we will "Reap the whirlwind" because of it unless we change our direction.
No. We know our congress. Whatever the majority wants they never get.
|
If these were the finalists for the Republican nominee in '08, which one would you choose?
|
||||||||||||
Tom will NEVER be allowed on a ticket by the useful (to the left) Republican hierarchy.
From another FR Thread:
Americans support building a security fence along the entire 2,000 mile U.S.- Mexican border by a landslide, a new Time magazine poll has found.
By a margin of 56 to 40 percent, respondents said they want the wall built from sea to shining sea - not just the 700 miles stipulated in the House plan, a proposal the press calls "draconian."
In more evidence that the American people want a tougher crackdown on illegal immigration than anything favored by Congress or the media, 62 percent told Time that they favored using the military to guard the border. Just 35 percent opposed.
But the poll's biggest shocker may be on the question of deporting illegals back to their native country, an option that politicians and the press say is out of the question.
Time found, however, that 47 percent of those surveyed actually favor deporting "all illegal immigrants." 49 percent were opposed.
And 51 percent said the U.S. would be "better of" if all illegals were deported and the border sealed to prevent any more from coming in. Just 38 percent disagreed.
A full 75 percent say illegals should be denied government supplied healthcare and food stamps, with 21 percent saying they should get those benefits. 69 percent say illegals shouldn't be allowed to get U.S. drivers licenses.
Time surveyed 1004 adult Americans on March 29 and 30. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 3 percent
I still refuse to vote in this poll ... I rather stay home.
So this guy believes one has no rights unless they are Government Approved? Hmmmm
Tancredo will not win ONE primary. No one is going to keep him from the ticket particularly any MYTHICAL republican "hierarchy". This silly poll just shows how far from the mainstream many on FR truly are. Tancredo has ZERO chance of being a candidate and for good reason.
Hilarious. How are you going to accomplish that when he will not win even ONE primary?
If you go back to GWB's formal request for a solution back in early 2004, he repeatedly asserts "no amnesty" and that the guest worker program should not serve as a path to citizenship or permanent residency. He also asked for three-year visas renewable for two cycles, then you go home.
So why do Senate RINOs make the big issue that of citizenship and permanent residency? No one wants it, and no one is asking for it.
If you discard that strawman of an issue, the Senate is left with a handful of simple ones: how to fix CIS/INS to handle the applications; how to beef up border enforcement; how to beef up domestic enforcement.
The citizenship issue is a bogeyman designed to prevent a vote on the simpler but more difficult issues.
And what, pray tell Mr. Shut Up, would that good reason be?
Well, we can only hope. A great #2 candidate for this dream ticket would be Gov. Sanford (SC).
I believe the OBL's are upset with Tancreado because he won't vote for legislation that creates greater economic benefits for this crowd. At least that was what a poster on another forum stated. I haven't looked up the stats yet.
Because he is a nutcase for one.
Such the same was said about President Bush.
Are you suggesting Tom's popularity on FR is an aberration? I would venture if Tancredo coupled a tightened border security with reductions in federal expenditures and more focused spending habits, ergo taxes, better schools, prison crowding reductions, healthcare solidification, social security protection measures, you'd see his popularity among average voters flourish wildly, much to the chagrin of unethical businesses.
One reminder though, illegal aliens nor felon businesses vote. Individual citizens do.
No one called Bush a "nutcase" when he ran. He was called a "drunk" a "moron", a "cokehead" and just about every other name under the sun but not "nutcase".
Yes Tancredo's "popularity" on FR is an aberration. Many voted for him in the poll strictly to pressure the GOP knowing full well that he has no chance. Just as I voted for Alan Keyes in the Il. primary (after it became obvious that Bush would win) knowing full well that he would not have the slightest chance of getting the nomination.
Your "program" for him sounds as good as any other Pie-in-the-Sky program but even that would not allow Tancredo to win even ONE primary.
Where did you get the idea Illegals don't vote? What would stop them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
