Posted on 01/13/2004 5:54:13 AM PST by JustPiper
Conservative talk-radio star, author says amnesty is betrayal of country
In the latest indication President Bush is having problems with his conservative core political constituency, Michael Savage, one of talk radio's biggest stars, tonight called for the impeachment of President Bush over his plans to legalize millions of illegal aliens.
"This is the worst betrayal of our country in my lifetime," said Savage, whose program is heard on more than 350 stations with an audience reaching some 6 million. His book, "The Savage Nation," last year was No. 1 on the New York Times best-seller's list for five weeks. His follow-up, "The Enemy Within," out just one week, is already No. 8 on the list. Both were published by WND Books.
President Bush
Tonight Savage called Bush a liberal and described him as part of the "enemy within" that is destroying the nation.
Savage created the phrase "compassionate conservative" in 1994, a term picked up by Bush during his presidential campaign – a campaign supported by Savage.
"This is much more serious than dropping your pants for an intern," said Savage. "This is a policy that represents a danger to national security."
Savage is hardly alone in his strong feelings of opposition to Bush's proposal to offer legal status to illegal immigrants. A new ABC News poll finds 52 percent of the nation opposes an amnesty program for illegal immigrants from Mexico, while 57 percent oppose one for illegal immigrants from other countries. Both results are roughly the same as when the administration floated the idea two-and-a-half years ago.
But today in Monterrey, Mexico, Bush reaffirmed his support of the proposal, despite its unpopularity at home. He said it could help illegal immigrants "leave the shadows and have an identity."
At a joint press conference with Mexican President Vicente Fox, Bush warned that his government will not allow the existence in the United States of an underclass of illegal immigrants, but claimed again his proposal is not an amnesty. Amnesty, he said, would only promote the violation of the law and perpetuate illegal immigration.
Bush said his immigration proposal would benefit both the United States and Mexico as it recognizes the contribution of thousands of honest Mexicans who work in the United States.
For his part, Fox embraced Bush's proposal.
"What else can we wish?" Fox said at the news conference with the president.
In the U.S., the latest poll on the controversy shows at least twice as many Americans "strongly" oppose the proposal as strongly support it.
Opposition peaks in Bush's own party: Fifty-eight percent of Republicans oppose his immigration proposal for Mexicans, compared with 50 percent of Democrats. For illegal immigrants other than Mexicans, 63 percent of Republicans are opposed.
Bush reportedly will disclose more details of the plan in his State of the Union address Jan. 20.
Meanwhile, the National Border Patrol Council, which represents all 9,000 of the Border Patrol's non-supervisory agents, has told its members to challenge President Bush´s proposed guest-worker program, calling it a "slap in the face to anyone who has ever tried to enforce the immigration laws of the United States," the Washington Times reported today.
The agents were told in a letter from Vice President John Frecker that the proposal offered last week during a White House press conference "implies that the country really wasn't serious about" immigration enforcement in the first place.
"Hey, you know all those illegal aliens you risked 'life and limb' to apprehend? FAH-GED-ABOWD-IT," said Frecker, a veteran Border Patrol agent. "President Bush has solved the problem. Don't be confused and call this an 'amnesty,' even though those who are here illegally will suddenly become legal and will be allowed to stay here. The president assures us that it's not an amnesty," he said.
Last week Bush proposed the sweeping immigration changes that would allow the 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens thought to be in the United States to remain in the country if they have a job and apply for a guest-worker card. The immigrants could stay for renewable three-year periods, after which they could apply for permanent legal residence.
Savage cited a new report published in the City Journal by the Manhattan Institute suggesting there is a major crime wave in the U.S. caused by illegal immigration.
"Some of the most violent criminals at large today are illegal aliens," the report charges. "Yet in cities where the crime these aliens commit is highest, the police cannot use the most obvious tool to apprehend them: their immigration status. In Los Angeles, for example, dozens of members of a ruthless Salvadoran prison gang have sneaked back into town after having been deported for such crimes as murder, assault with a deadly weapon, and drug trafficking. Police officers know who they are and know that their mere presence in the country is a felony. Yet should a cop arrest an illegal gang-banger for felonious reentry, it is he who will be treated as a criminal, for violating the LAPD’s rule against enforcing immigration law."
The situation is similar, the report says in New York, Chicago, San Diego, Austin and Houston. These "sanctuary policies" generally prohibit city employees, including the cops, from reporting immigration violations to federal authorities, says the report.
"These people are destroying America," said Savage. "That's all I have to say on the subject. But you can talk about it. Talk about it while you can – while America is still a free country, because it's not going to last."
Ok give me what you would consider a "racist" remark.
I had an odd thought about this. (Putting on tin foil hat now). What if Savage is not at all what he seems?
I've come up with 2 conclusions about him. He's either
A. A not so very smart, very emotional, occasionally irrational, conservative.
or
B. He's an absolutely brilliant operative for the democrats. (think Tokyo Rose here)
If he is B. my hats off to the democrats-a magnificent strategy if I ever saw one.
Let me point out why I think he might be B.
First of all, there's stepfather not voting for Bush. This is directly related to his listening to Savage=Benefits Democrats
Savage claims he used to be a Social Worker=Leftist career
He lives in San Francisco=extreme leftist city
He has a PHD= he'd be smart enough to pretend to be on our side, but actually be working for their side.
He demoralizes conservatives-that's why I referred to Tokyo Rose-she tried to destroy the morale of our troops he does that to conservatives, and he always does it during election time.=benefits democrats
He tries to go after Bush any time he can. He cuts him no slack, gives him no benefit of the doubt and attempts to inflict maximum damage. He tells people he's not going to vote at all- stay home=benefit democrats
I remember during the Iraq War, he was a total downer. He predicted gloom and doom for our troops, I remember him saying something like "Our sons and daughters are at the hands of soulless ghouls"= Very emotional, and negative. He ripped Bush, said the troops weren't being supported I mean he just about came unglued.(like the liberals did). He didn't sound very much different than the 'rats and their "quagmire" and "body-bags coming home by the thousands" rhetoric. Benefit=democrats
What about how emotional he does get. I mean our side doesn't get that emotional-but lefties do.
What if the democrats found someone smart enough (PHD) to pretend to be a conservative talk radio host, but, who really uses his influence to demoralize the right, at strategic moments, into not supporting their candidate?
Some things I can say about Savage are that he's very colorful, very creative, and has a flair for language and words. He's a very unique individual, no matter what side he's playing for- I'll give him that.
But, even creativity is something that points , traditionally, a bit more to the left than to the right-The hollywood stars and music people tend to be lefties
Even the name "Savage" sort of seems to imply extremism, hate exc.. it's something the left would call us.
What if somebody did a psychological profile of the average conservative voter and what would appeal them , and then set out to become that profile? Savage talks about the 50's, plays the music from that time (Ilike this by the way). That was the Ike era right? It would appeal. He says things in his books that most conservatives would like to say, but can't or won't.
If I'm wrong, my apologies to Mr. Savage. If I'm right my applause to him for a brilliant strategy (remember the Russian CIA guy who turned out to be a big-time spy against our country? Everybody was shocked and didn't believe it at first).
The strongest reason I have to believe this is because Savage never misses an opportunity to put Bush down, I mean never. Anytime he can turn the knife, he does.
He talks the talk, but, he doesn't walk the walk. (taking off tin foil hat now)
LOL you wouldn't know a point if you sat on it. There has NEVER been a business in history that could survive as a profit making enterprise that cared more about its workers than its profit. I can't believe that anyone, especially a supposed conservative, would believe in such fairy tales.
I can see that you're tempted, but in the words or our illustrious host, "Don't be an ass".
--Boot Hill
Then he comes back the next day and whines he was just "trying to save the Bush presidency". He doesn't even have the GUTS to stick with his impeachment demand. Being a racist is one of his more appealing traits. I can stand a principled racist but I can't abide a punk.
Does this mean we ain't gonna blow things up? Damn you had my hopes so high. Well you should change your name to Bootie Hill. I am really disillusioned.
Hey I am on your side and the now Bootie hill's side and the B4Ranch side. Let's round 'em up. Let's collect that bounty.
What kind of response is that. You made an assertion that someone is a racist. Now you are asking me to make a racist remark? Your mind is definitely off track. You made an accusation, now back it up. Don't ask me to help you, because I didn't make the claim.
The fact that you disagree with someone is not grounds for calling someone a racist. I disagree with a lot of people, but I don't go around calling them racists. I have heard Michael Savage and President Bush both say things i disagreed with, but I didn't feel the need to call them racist. that's just intellectually racist.
--Boot Hill
What difference does it make? Illegals are already voting. As the dead and in the case of Illinois, illegals voting multiple times! Do I like this PROPOSAL?? No, I dont, but thats all it is, a proposal, it is to be debated and and sent through the legislature. The onus is on us to stop this. I have told the RNC and the MO Repub party, no more money until the foolishness has stopped. In addition, I have called both of my senators daily, and emailed the WH daily. Im keeping the pressure on. What are you doing about it? Other than questioning my motives I mean?
You talk of party before country, Im putting country before party by stopping this the grass roots way, so I can still vote for W. It would be tresonous to allow petulance to elect Dean. Nobody who claims to be for America would dream of letting Clark, Clinton, or Dean in as President, because thats what sitting out the vote will do.
Rather than flame me, join me. You have been around here long enough, I dont have to show you where to find the contact numbers for your Reps and Sens. WWW.House.gov, www.senate.gov, and www.whitehouse.gov. Contact your reps, and stop the Dems from taking the Oval Office. Have a nice day.
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.