Posted on 12/17/2009 7:01:05 AM PST by La Lydia
The Democratic amnesty bill is almost like something I'd write as a parody. Sec. 157, for instance, prohibits the arrest of any illegal or criminal alien on the premises of, or in the immediate vicinity of, a childcare provider, a school, a legal-service provider, a Federal court or State court proceeding, an administrative proceeding, a funeral home, a cemetery, a college, university, or community college, a victim-services agency, a social-service agency, a hospital or emergency-care center, a health-care clinic, a place of worship, a day-care center, a head-start center, a school bus stop, a recreation center, a mental-health facility, or a community center.
Depending on how you define "immediate vicinity," that wouldn't leave much of anywhere to arrest illegal aliens, which is the point.
But this bill is more than just an object of hilarity. It accurately reveals what the open-borders side really wants, or at least what they think they can safely reveal about their goals.
The counterpart bill in the Senate, to be introduced...by Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham, will have the same broad outlines but won't be quite as wacky. But the difference between the bills won't simply be one of degree, like whether we should buy 10 new fighter jets or 20.
Rather, the Senate bill will be an exercise in taqiyya or dissimulation, an attempt to deceive the public into believing that the supporters of legalization will vigorously enforce new, tougher immigration laws in the future once the current illegal population is amnestied.
The House bill makes clear, in this provision and in many others, that that's simply not true.
(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...
ping
Ahem. I noticed a Republican (RINO) name attached to this bill. McCain is also likely to support it along with other Republican “moderates”. No need to single out the Dems, there’s plenty of blame to go around.
The bill will be passed in the Senate. The battle will be in the House.
Exactly. Plenty of the GOP support this invasion too.
I don’t know if there are any Republican names attached to the House bill, I somehow doubt that because it is so outrageous. The Senate bill hasn’t been introduced yet, but it will be no huge surprise to discover McCain and the South Carolina Weeping Pansy’s names attached. The Democratic leadership, which controls both houses of Congress, is nuts for doing this in an election year, and concurrently with the health care “reform” legislation. Of course there is plenty of blame to go around, has been for decades. What is your point?
When someone is about to be arrested from now on, just yell that you are illegally in the country and you can not be arrested
I am not so sure about the Senate. Many of them are looking over their shoulders already. And of course, it will depend to a certain extent on the amount of blowback they receive from constituents, as it did the last time.
“What is your point”?
There’s already an R name attached:
“The counterpart bill in the Senate, to be introduced...by Chuck Schumer and Lindsey Graham,”
My point is that this isn’t a Dem only bill. That leads one to the conclusion that they have the votes to pass it. Elementary my dear Watson.
If it was a done deal in the Senate, Schumer would have already introduced it. Duh. *Thanks for the Condescending Remarks*
But the difference between the bills won’t simply be one of degree, like whether we should buy 10 new fighter jets or 20.
Actually, they don’t want to buy any new fighters.
Gotta save that money for the Health Care Scam, and SEIU ...
Ya gotta yell what facility you are close to ...
I thought that Pelosi was going to spare her beleagured Dems further ‘controversial’ votes, with this bill in mind.
She is throwing them under the bus wholesale! They are going to be picked off like sitting ducks, thanks to the leadership in both the House and Senate.
We didn’t have a 60-40 Dem controlled Senate last time. And if you recall, the 2006 Hagel-Martinez bill passed in the Rep controlled Senate with 23 Reps voting for it and 32 against it.
SEc. 157....leave ‘em alone zones....everywhere!
This is why these bills are thousands of pages long. To provide a loophole for everything and everyone!
Anyone heard Sarah Palin speak out against this amnesty?
She seems to have a public opinion on everything else.
On the long interview she did with Univision, she said she does not support amnesty for illegals. I think she has equivocated on this issue in the past, but now she has realized which way the wind blows.
But does she actually believe in the rule of law and enforcing that law?
Or is she just putting her finger to the wind like McCain, Romney, and the rest of the opportunistic RINOs?
La Lydia, Palin, last week on Lars Larson, when asked about amnesty said...’No, not the kind of amnesty the dems want...’
So, what kind of AMNESTY does she support? The McCain kind?
C’mon, she’s dodging this like the plague. Why? She’s on record against deportation, workplace enforcement and supports a path to citizenship. And today, she supports McCain 100%.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2409178/posts
If nothing else, you should at least be confused by her contradictions. Fact is, we don’t have one GOP hopeful who is worth a damn on this issue.
“La Lydia, Palin, last week on Lars Larson, when asked about amnesty said...’No, not the kind of amnesty the dems want...’
So, what kind of AMNESTY does she support? The McCain kind?
C’mon, she’s dodging this like the plague. Why? She’s on record against deportation, workplace enforcement and supports a path to citizenship. And today, she supports McCain 100%.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2409178/posts";
This was Sarah at her parsing worst. Even when Larson tried to put the right words directly in her mouth, she stuttered and stammered.
She is for amnesty(just her OWN brand of it).
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.