Posted on 06/11/2007 12:25:20 PM PDT by Daralundy
Bush's surge to save his immigration bill.
The Fool-the-Yahoos Surge: Meetings have been held, tactics adopted, talking points synchronized. The new Bush counterinsurgency strategy to reverse the course of the immigration debate seems to have two components:
1) Exude confidence. "We are winning" ... sorry, that's what Bush said about the war in Iraq. Here's what his Commerce secretary said about the immigration Grand Bargain: "This bill is alive and well .... I have no doubt. This is going to go through ...."
2) Stress all the enforcement provisions in the bill, while pretending you've gotten the message:
"I know some of you doubt that the Federal government will make good on the border security and enforcement commitments in this bill ... [W]e are now committing more resources than ever before to border security, doubling the number of Border Patrol agents, building hundreds of miles of fencing, and employing advanced technology, from infrared sensors to unmanned aerial vehicles. The bill builds on this progress by requiring that we meet border security objectives before certain other provisions can take effect."
--President Bush, President's Radio Address, June 8. [E.A.]
"Because I think a lot of people have concerns about security and our message is: 'We heard you. Take a look at what's going on with this bill.'" ...
"If you take a look at the bill, it is the largest investment ever in border security. ... This bill says ... harsh punishments for employers." ...
"And furthermore, we have a mechanism now for knowing who the illegals are, where they are, whether they're working, whether they're breaking the law and if they're not working and they're not obeying the law, they get sent out."
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
"The status quo is de facto amnesty."
President Bush has many strong points, this however has to be his weakest. How can he be so wrong?
Until the borders are secured, no plan (mass deportation, full amnesty, or anything inbetween) will mean a damn.
Build the fence, enforce the laws on the books, pardon the BP agents doing their job. Until then this is an insult to the legal tax paying American citizen.
Stressing enforcement after seven years of not opens too many holes they might not want to have opened.
His daimetric opposite is Wolf Blitzer. I pray that Americans don't believe his ongoing propaganda that amnesty is the moderate, "middle" position.
I don’t understand Tony Snow on this. He KNOWS the conservative base is smart enough to see through this.
What is happening to me? I find myself in total agreement with Slate! The person in the MSM that I most identify with lately is CNN’s Lou Dobbs! Am I leaving the conservative movement, or has the Republican hierarchy completely abandoned me to the extent that I am finding friends in odd places? Frankly, where I find myself disagreeing with the president and other leading Republicans, I’m pretty sure I’m the one taking the conservative position.
My own president accuses me of not wanting to do what’s right for the country, while his surrogates call me a racist outright. And here in Freeperland I’m heckled as a nut for saying that the only presidential candidates I like are Paul, Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter. They are consistent, and right, on this issue.
As for the front-runners:
1) Giuliani is a lib on every issue, including borders;
2) Romney is a sudden conversion from liberal to conservative that I’m somehow supposed to trust;
3)McCain is completely wrong on this issue; and
4)Fred Thompson had a sudden conversion from moderate to conservative that I am also supposed to trust (though the Romney supporters, ironically, trust him the least) even though he voted for all past amnesties, campaign finance reform, and is a member of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations, the good folks who brought us this amnesty mess as part of their plan for a North American Union, followed by a world government.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. Libertarians on both the right and left seem to be disgusted with both parties and agreeing with one another for the first time. Those in power, in both parties, have decided they know best and will rule us regardless of our positions on the issues.
I haven’t seen any approval numbers on Bush lately. Last number I heard was 29%. Could he become the first president ever to go down to the single digits?
Tony isn't talking to us. He's talking to a few senators the administration thinks they can bend to the dark side. He's telling them that we are few and don't really matter much, so don't worry that your phone just melted.
I noticed in the past few days that the supporters are really pounding on the "no bill = de facto amnesty" meme. They know that amnesty is unpopular and are trying to confuse everyone about which side is for amnesty. More spin from the White House on this than a room full of whirling dervishes watching Twister.
Those sound like the talking points of Microsoft when they were peddling IE7 and Vista: "We heard you". I think not, you're bad liars and even worse salesmen.
Yes, all the Bush Administration posturing camouflages a weak position and desire to fool the yahoos. Guess what, no one is being fooled.
“harsh punishments for employers”
I promise, a federal bailiff will whack their pee-pees.
That will be his only job. Thank you for your support.
President Jorge Bustamonte Consuela Jiminez Boosh
I Like Ike.
Take the Pledge: "I pledge to never, ever vote for anyone, for any office, who votes in favor of the Mexican Invasion Surrender Bill."
“Am I leaving the conservative movement, or has the Republican hierarchy completely abandoned me”
Don’t confuse the two.
The solution is obvious: Make it de jure. </sarcasm>
How can we account for this historic miscalculation, this political tone-deafness in the capitol?
“4)Fred Thompson had a sudden conversion from moderate to conservative that I am also supposed to trust (though the Romney supporters, ironically, trust him the least)”
Hmmm. I support Romney in many ways, but I realize right up front that while Thompson may be as acceptable as Romney on this issue.
You can find statements or even votes that show both are not superhawks ready to shut down the border and deport em all.
If you want that and its #1 issue, support Hunter! The key point is that Thompson and Romney both ‘get it’ on amnesty - they are saying “NO” to amnesty/legalization as in the Senate immigration bill. Romney has dared to sue the word “attrition” so he’s paying attention to the details. And Thompson is speaking out about Mexico’s responsibility.
Both Romney and Thompson will do a better job on enforcement than Bush has.
Rudy is a sanctuary cities supporter. Bad. McCain needs to have his whole presidential bid crash and burn as a warning to the other politicians considering this idea.
Hawks: Hunter, Tancredo
Acceptable/Good on isue: Romney, Thompson,
Squishy: Huckabee (DREAM lover), Brownback (voted for it last year)
Unacceptable: Rudy, McCain
“I noticed in the past few days that the supporters are really pounding on the “no bill = de facto amnesty” meme. They know that amnesty is unpopular and are trying to confuse everyone about which side is for amnesty. More spin from the White House on this than a room full of whirling dervishes watching Twister.”
For ONCE we can feel grateful that the WH spin is pathetic.
I laugh at their unconvincing spin!
http://www.slate.com/id/2168226/&#foolyahoos
“1. If all these enforcement measures are so wonderful, why not enact just them and drop the questionable legalization part? Bush is holding the parts of the bill everyone says they want hostage to the parts he wants.”
“5. If illegals “live in fear” under the status quo, as we’re told, then how is the status quo “silent amnesty”?”
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.