Your, Sean Hannity's, and the tancrednistas newest hero, bill richardson, in his full glory.
Posted on 08/16/2005 9:14:09 AM PDT by SC33
Democratic hopefuls for 2008 are sensing how vulnerable President Bush is on border control. The latest sign: New Mexico's politically shrewd governor, Bill Richardson, has made a partial about-face on the issue -- at least in words -- and is throwing money and attention at his state's southern border. If he makes a national comeback from the Energy Department security scandals that all but ruined his reputation in the final years of the Clinton administration, it will owe in part to a seeming shift on border control that mirrors the one that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton made in December and then reneged upon.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
An excellent summation of the current political reality. Polls consistantly show support for total closure of our borders at close to 70%, and the GOP continues to sit on the point of their sword. Then the pro immigration group here, which appears to number about 9 or 10, trumpets their strength. It would be funny if it were not so tragic.
John Hawkins: In poll after poll, by a large margin, Americans have appeared to support cracking down on illegal immigrants. Why do we have so many people in government who still don't seem to take our immigration laws seriously?
Tom Tancredo: Because they don't believe that people will vote on it exclusively. Most of my colleagues believe that they will be able to finesse this issue. That is to say, that they will be able to tell their constituents "Yes it is a problem, we'll have to look at it," but it won't be the thing most people vote on, it won't be the ultimate issue. As long as that's the case, they can get by with finessing it.
John Hawkins: But why are they finessing it? Why not just take it on?
Tom Tancredo: There are three reasons. The Democratic Party looks at massive immigration, legal and illegal, as a source of voters. The Republican Party looks at massive immigration, legal and illegal, as a source of cheap labor, satisfying a very important constituency. The third reason, of course, is that the President of the United States is trying to create a wedge issue here and trying to get a portion of Hispanics to vote for him where they haven't in the past. So you have these three huge problems with trying to get anything done in the Congress.
Obviously this interview took place before the last election, but the basic facts haven't changed.
Your, Sean Hannity's, and the tancrednistas newest hero, bill richardson, in his full glory.
We keep hearing that, but the politicians who take on the issue can't seem to get themselves elected. Why do you suppose that is?
It's a crisis, alright, not made any better by an untrustworthy Democrat getting publicity for something he is not going to do anyway.
Tancredo is the only one in recent memory to do so; who else took up the issue?
I saw an article here yesterday about Tom DeLay signing on with Tom Tancredo's plan.
We're not out of the running yet. And .. remember .. all those dems who are now supporting immigration reform have a voting record AGAINST immigration reform.
No one. If border control is really as popular as they say, then I don't see why the politicians don't push it, and I don't see why the voters don't elect politicians who will push it.
The problem is now less the border than how do we get rid of the millions of illegals here? The open border crowd has achieved its goal of flooding this country with illegals. The OBL's don't care at this point if the door is shut. They got what they wanted.
It's always fun unless you're not in the choir. I take it this means you won't be joining us. We'll try not to be too disappointed.
We're always interested in welcoming more conservatives. We couldn't care less about the kool-aid guzzling GOP Big Tent true believers. As I said, this a conservative site for conservatives.
Seems to me support for much stricter border controls is gaining critical mass among the hoi-poloi as the problem, previously restricted to a few counties in border states, has gotten MUCH worse over the past 15 years. As usual, politicians are the last to know what their constituents (the ones that don't pony up large lumps of campaign cash or deliver huge blocks of votes) want. But they are in the process of finding out and will sooner be rushing to get to the front of the parade, IMO.
Business interests. They are enjoying their new slave class too much.
Which is why Prop 187 passed in Cali, right? Which is why Davis was recalled? Which is why Prop 2 passed in AZ? Sorry, the average voter is tired of you getting cheaper workers that the rest of us have to pay for.
Are you just baiting me for practice or are you trying to make a point? If the latter, your point is lost on me.
They convinced me. That's why I'm here.
Ah I see. Better to preach to the choir and feel good about oneself then ACTUALLY do anything meaningful to advance the agenda. My mistake, I thought people actually cared about the issue and wanted something done.
Pickin' at my eye with that log in yours, eh? I'm a Minuteman, what have you done, besides making a fool out of yourself trying to confuse a simple issue. Illegal Immigration is a crime and threat to this nation. More citizens have died at the hands of illegal immigrants than died on 9/11. Enforce the law.
Richardson's only doing what he is in order to encourage a guest worker/shamnesty bill to get passed. If anything Dane you should be thrilled at the governor's deceitful antics since you along with Napolitano and Senator Bingaman all have the same agenda.
I completely agree...I am wondering what actions I'll take in 2008 if, possibly, the Democrats nominate a Hillary ticket with a firm anti-illegal immigration/secure our borders effectively stance, versus a Republican "guest workers, open borders, we only have five hundred agents available" stance.
I am just not liking the options here, but the problem of illegal immigration and employment of illegal aliens in our nation has, from the look of things even at present, changed our nation's economy for the worse, certainly created a third-world nation in many other conditions, removed opportunities for so many more while accommodating bad behavior to do so (my take on this issue).
It seems that we can chose now to make a stand for the country, or for some sort of "Americas"-commerce state of things.
I am not opposed to working well with friendly nations but the options to dissolve the U.S. as a single nation on our two shared continents (North and South America) is not something I'd ever endorse. The GOP is dissapointing on this issue but worse, they are not available to explain why or even what their motivations are. I think if there was ever some clear statement by the GOP that most voters could understand, people would at least feel informed at the voting booth.
Ha, yeah, it looks like the Democrats have the same problem as do the Republicans: neither has made a position clear or even cloudy about whatever related to illegal immigration, and voters are left to their own devices...
A THIRD party? I dunno but I'd consider it at this point, and about this one issue alone.
What are you talking about. chris simcox leader of the minutemen just got publiclly snubbed on Hannity's show by bill richardson, but simcox still priaises him, yet simcox has as much venom towards Bush as cindy sheehan does.
If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.
Contact Governor Perry here:
http://www.governor.state.tx.us/contact
Now is not the time to play politics. We need a strong bipartisan coalition.
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.