Posted on 04/05/2006 5:50:41 AM PDT by zook
WASHINGTON — Accusing politicians of "pounding their chests" on immigration for short-term political gain, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush said Tuesday that the tone of the debate had been "hurtful" to him and his Mexican-born wife, Columba.
Bush, the younger brother of President Bush, reserved some of his sharpest criticism for conservatives in his own Republican Party, calling it "just plain wrong" to charge illegal immigrants with a felony, as a provision passed by the Republican-led House would do. He also opposed "penalizing the children of illegal immigrants" by denying them U.S. citizenship, an idea backed by some conservatives but not included in the legislation.
"My wife came here legally, but it hurts her just as it hurts me when people give the perception that all immigrants are bad," the Florida governor wrote in an e-mail exchange with The Times.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Well, Governor, it is YOU that is spewing that message, not us.
Our language is quite precise: We always refer to 'illegal aliens', whereas your crowd plays semantic games that are only designed to make us look bad and to lump all immigrants together into one undesirable pot!
Jeb, you're a hypocrite.
(Is that plain enough for you?)
Jeb IS politicizing the argument vis-a-vis the people who voted for him by calling them anti-immigrant and by deliberately blurring the line between legals and illegals.
I wish the discourse were more civil, too. But on this issue, it won't be for several reasons.
One of them is Bush style statements--'vigilantes', 'anti-immigrant', 'racist.'
Another is Teddy Kennedy style statements: 'vigilantes', 'anti-immigrant', 'racist.'
Another is the very small, imho, group of anti's who genuinely don't want brown skinned people in America and they can be nasty (the Buchanan approach)--a pox on them as they tar the rest of us.
Finally, and probably most important, the folks who want border security can see the bait-and-switch coming yet again. We understand that, no matter how much public support there is for closing the border, it will never happen. The American people are utterly powerless to affect government policy on this issue. Over the next 20 years, massive numbers of illegals will enter this country over a porous border, with the tacit (R) or explicit (D) approval of the Bushes and the Kennedys--the only thing left unclear is the form of the laws passed to make it appear (for the purposes of the next election) as if that will not happen.
It has become clear that nothing any of does here can change this and that infuriates us. When that happens, some of the rhetoric gets inflammatory. Some of us even use the 'T' word, which I personally think inappropriate.
No, the frustrating thing is, he was certainly a worse choice. I have counseled my libertarian son about throwing away his vote by voting for a 3rd party, and yet now, I am really not sure what I'll do in the next election. Do I take the pragmatic approach, hold my nose and vote for Republicans as the lesser of the 2 electible evils? Or, do I vote my conscience and find another candidate I can support, even tho he/she will not win, and send a message. It's a conundrum to me.
susie
I might stop using the word Conservative and go with Patriot from now on. Republican and Conservative don't have the same meaning in America anymore.
Now we know to look for someone else when it comes time to pick a GOP candidate for President!
I had to update to my old tagline.
Why don't you respond to my question instead of just making accusation?
Seriously, if half of the illegals here refuse to sign up and "come out of the shadows" because they will be forced into a pay cut, will you favor deporting them and punish employers who undermine the system?
Its not a complicated question. The reason I ask is that there seems to be zero mention of this, and in fact this is what is most likely to happen once these "guests" realize that by signing up for this program, they will be getting a pay cut.
Excellent question. I'll be watching for his answer too.
LOL
susie
And in the primaries, I'll be voting for "Better than McCain",
and in the General, "Better than Hillary".
I'm getting off this train, it's on the wrong track
Very well said. Great post.
Employers who break the law should be punished as well because they perpetuate the problem.
Amnesty is only allowed in the most extreme cases of illegals who came here longer than 5 years ago and have established residency/family status. They should be required to pay any back taxes, or some portion of it.
Any new illegals should be caught and deported and registered. If they repeat again, they then should be given a prison sentence and later deported. The Mexican government should be fined for repeat offenders.
Illegals bring 55 billion $ per year into Mexico's economy, in order to stop the flow, Mexico should be held accountable for not stopping the flow.
I think a better question is, does the word "Bushbot" have a place on a conservative forum?
I don't like Jeb Bush blurring the issue on the immigration debate. That does not add clarity to the problem, nor does it move accomodation between the two sides forward.
In the same vein, flinging "Bushbot" at the other side causes the same problem. And Mineral Man is correct that casually using the term "treason" does the same.
I'm sooo glad you and your ilk are able to arrogantly sit back to mock and heckle fellow Freepers you don't agree with. Maybe we should charge you for the pleasure since you obviously need more constructive entertainment.
I think that you are like the liberal that is yet to be mugged so may a "demonstration" occur in your neighbor hood, better yet right in front of your house, some time soon. I bet it will change your perspective.
Alan Keyes is a brilliant Constitutional scholar, but a poor politician, as he proved in Illinois.
What the heck is a "POS?"
"Seriously, if half of the illegals here refuse to sign up and "come out of the shadows" because they will be forced into a pay cut, will you favor deporting them and punish employers who undermine the system?
"
Yes, that is likely to happen, and it will simply continue the stalemate already in place on this issue. And that's what we have going now -- a stalemate.
Logistically, we have no way to effectively deport the number of illegal aliens in this country. We cannot jail and fine all those who employ them, either, because our current laws only require them to make a good faith effort to assure themselves that their employees are legal. There's no real system employers can use to determine absolutely the legality of an individual, who probably has very good forged papers.
Further, there are so many who employ illegals, either knowingly or not, that the loss of this many workers would cause a collapse in several industries...not just agricultural industries.
Finally, some of the biggest contributors to campaigns for both parties are employers of illegals, either knowingly or not.
The bottom line is that we are NOT going to deport the 11-12 million illegals currently in this country. That is NOT going to happen, because it's essentially impossible, and certainly impolitic.
So, what do we do about them? We can't deport them, for the reasons listed above and for some unlisted reasons I don't have time to detail. So, what do we do? It appears that we are going to make them legal by fiat. That, according to just about everyone in political position, will fix that.
Reagan did it, and for the same reasons.
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.