Savage: Impeach Bush over immigration plan

WND ^ | 1-12-04 | N/A

[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."

[TommyUdo]

I'm proud of you.

My "heritage" (if American's can have such, I've always referred to "American" as a separate race of people--as did Winston Churchill) is weird, I am one of the few people of my acquaintance that has no trace of the "Immigrant Invasion" of the 19th and early 20th Century! Both sides of my family were here before the borders became "United States" ones!

Please accept a big "Welcome" from me, personally, and we'll see you at the barricades, or should I say barricada? Is that an archaic form of "Got your back, homes?"

[Modernman]

You don't think the American culture and penchant for liberty, the solemn dignity of our Constitution, and the reverence of our ancestors is worth keeping?

Very few of us can actually track our ancestors back to the original colonies, so I'm not sure that's a relevant point.

An appreciation of American culture, liberty and the Constitution is not a genetic trait. Native-born Americans used to think that Catholics couldn't be loyal Americans because their true allegiance was to the Pope. Anyone can be assimilated into believing in American values, whether they came here legally or illegally. We just haven't been putting enough emphasise on assimilation.

All the other stuff, like preferences in food, ethnic origin or America's favorite sport, change over time and have little, if nothing, to do with American culture. To quote the Sopranos: "Until Italians got here, Americans knew s**t about food."

And, anyway, I like tan women.

[exmarine]

For the most part, he caves in to congress routinely, but is still anti-affirmative action, at least for the most part. The Michigan case was not a total defeat, since it did reduce the level of affirmative action, even if it did uphold it partially.

You may think that compromise on truth is okay, I don't. Either affirmative action is wrong or it isn't. There is no in between. I don't like compromisers.

And you ought to know that Bush, or ANY president, isn't going to condemn an entire religion. What the hell are you thinking? Right or wrong, this ain't gonna happen.

I expect Bush to tell the truth. He is not theologian in chief and should SHUT UP about Islam being peace and worshpping the same God. This is contrary to Bush's professed faith.

Ok, he praised a gay church. Should he have? No. But no president is going to stand outside a church with a "die fags, die" sign, so maybe he should just have ignored it.

No one want anyone to die, but to praise a church that flouts immorality and represents destruction of marriage, is simply morally egregious for a man who claims to be a Christian and leader of the country with a judeo-christian roots. Bush speaks out of both sides of his mouth. He says in one breath that he will defend marriage, in the next breath, he praises a gay church! There is no excuse for this! It stinks! Stop making excuses.

This doesn't make him pro-gay, it just makes him more tolerant than I am of anti-natural behavior.

Wrong. "Tolerance" requires disagreement. Bush PRAISED the church. Praise connotes agreement! I think Americans need to get a dictionary and look up the defintion of tolerance. The NEW definition of tolerance is nothing more than "forced acceptance" - tolerance is NOT a virtue.

Bush isn't superman, and can't get the votes for it, and neither can anyone else. Remember how many votes it takes to get one passed? Now run those numbers with the pro vs anti-abortion numbers, and check your results. I too wish he'd use that veto pen, but he obviously lets congress pretty much have it their way.

Bush doesn't fight. He's a wimp when it comes to liberals, democrats, gays, and anyone else. The entire GOP are a bunch of spineless jellyfish. The rub elbows with those EVIL democrats (yes, I said EVIL!) as if they are drinking buddies or something. If I were AG, I would not enforce any law that was contrary to GOD'S ETERNAL LAWS. This is a sin. If Ashcroft or Bush had any guts, which they don't, they would refuse to enforce abortion laws. What are the courts going to do about it if they don't? Let's try it and see! Roe v. Wade is unconstitutional!

[AbsoluteJustice]

"What does that change about what I stated? I still have never met one conservative, out of thousands I know, that is not voting for GWB in November"

Well this is ONE Conservative of MANY that will not vote for a non-conservative pandering politician who wishes to sell out this country and his base.

[Texas_Dawg]

I'm proud of you. My "heritage" (if American's can have such, I've always referred to "American" as a separate race of people--as did Winston Churchill) is weird, I am one of the few people of my acquaintance that has no trace of the "Immigrant Invasion" of the 19th and early 20th Century! Both sides of my family were here before the borders became "United States" ones! Please accept a big "Welcome" from me, personally, and we'll see you at the barricades, or should I say barricada? Is that an archaic form of "Got your back, homes?"

Is there a point here somewhere?

[hedgetrimmer]

Have you read or heard Mr. Bush's remarks in Monterrey Mexico at the Summit of the Americas this week?

Please read up on what he is saying, what the Summit of the Americans is, and what the OAS is. You think it has nothing to do with us because it is outside this country, but in the last few weeks, the policy on illegal alien social security and illegal alien amnesty were both announced by the whitehouse. The origin of these policies? the 1998 summit of the Americas, where the United States go a directive, thats an order, to make social security available to illegals and to give them greater access to our country.

Now, think outside the box. This presidency and the last is a reflection of a change to the control of supranational organizations. It doesn't matter what the people of America thinks about immigration, because if it did there would be every politician in washington apologizing for the proposal. Instead they are down in Mexico, addressing the "citizens of the world" and busily reporting that they are implementing the directives of this socialist organization as quickly as possible.


The Prime minister of Canada said it in French and English-- we must 'redefine' sovereignty in the name of the Summit of the Americas.

[Modernman]

Where is the proof that Bush is a Freemason?

I've been told this by a Freemason. Take it for what it's worth. Anyway, who cares if he is or isn't?

[Texas_Dawg]

Well this is ONE Conservative of MANY that will not vote for a non-conservative pandering politician who wishes to sell out this country and his base.

Many? Can you show me even one in the public sphere? (Since I don't know you and we probably don't know any of the same people and none of the thousands of conservatives I know are going to vote against Bush like you.)

[Howlin]

Well, I sure don't; I was in Rainbow........LOL.

I just had never heard THAT particular accusation against Bush, and I'm pretty well read on him.

[Texas_Dawg]

For someone who claims to be a Christian, you sound pretty miserable.

[Modernman]

Please accept a big "Welcome" from me, personally, and we'll see you at the barricades, or should I say barricada? Is that an archaic form of "Got your back, homes?"

Thanks- of course, dealing with the INS makes America seem a lot less attractive sometimes.

"Barricades" is the right word, though, as I'm actually not that exotic- I'm a Canadian.

[onyx]

Rainbow and not Job's Daughters?

[Texas_Dawg]

"Barricades" is the right word, though, as I'm actually not that exotic- I'm a Canadian.

Haha. Nice.

[jaugust]

I'm finding your conversation interesting because I am in the same boat. Am currently unemployed and struggling with the possibility of changing careers. I have somewhat of a woodworking shop; saws, lathe, routers, etc, and am considering doing something along the same lines as you.

[hedgetrimmer]

Anyone can be assimilated into believing in American values, whether they came here legally or illegally.

Not just anyone.

But do you know what a hometown club is? It is a club funded by the governments of the southern countries, mostly mexico, whose goal is to keep people from assimilating, to keep their allegiance to their home country. Now make these people legal and give them the right to vote and do you think they'll vote to protect your rights? and to uphold traditional america values?

Right now there are thousands of hometown clubs all over the country and their goals are subversive to the American way.

[Modernman]

Please accept a big "Welcome" from me, personally, and we'll see you at the barricades, or should I say barricada? Is that an archaic form of "Got your back, homes?"

Thanks- of course, dealing with the INS makes America seem a lot less attractive sometimes.

"Barricades" is the right word, though, as I'm actually not that exotic- I'm a Canadian.

Both sides of my family were here before the borders became "United States" ones!

That freaks out a lot of Americans- they don't realize that a lot of Hispanics were living in the US before there was a US. A lot of Texans, for example, don't know that about a third of the Texan army during their war of independence was of Mexican origin. Could it be that liberty is attractive to all people?

[jim35]

Nice, but that's not at all where the thread has gone. This is about voting for, or voting against, GW, because of his policy. I am against this policy, as I have said, but not rabidly so. I think the law should be enforced, but I know our current system is practically useless. GW is a pretty smart guy, and for the most part I respect his judgement, so I'm not screaming and crying like some others, and I'm definitely going to vote for him again in '04.

[Howlin]

Only Rainbow, Junior League, and DAR, all well known anti-American groups........LOL.

[TommyUdo]

"Is there a point here somewhere? "

Yes.

I demand title to Rancho Palos Verdes, CA as reparations from the Gringos and as far as the Colonial English side of my family...I am waiting until the "Aliens" take over, then we'll talk.

[T.Smith]

"...short enough to get him elected in 2004, but bad long term. remember who is running for president in 2008? do you want to see her get elected?"

It's kind of depressing to think about, but, electing a Democrat in 2004 would probably stop Her Heinous from running in 2008. Who knows what the situation will be in 2012?

I know that doesn't make for good voting strategy, but it is probably true.