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."

[Jorge]

Savage wants people to die from AIDS and wants to impeach Bush.

Savage needs to go away quietly.

[txdoda]

That sounds right to me.>>>>>>>>

Thanks, I just ran across that poll & didn't know if it had been posted to he thread, & thought some would be interested.

YIKES, I hated to post my *fast math* in the middle of a loooong law dispute........(one dispute at a time, Please..)

The figure I was most interested in was the 79% AGAINST. Hopefully all will keep telling their reps NO 'rewards'.

Impeachment for a 'proposal' ?? *IF* this were possible, Bill wouldn't have been in the WH 6 months.......;o)

[onyx]

I'm quite suprized this hasn't made the smokey backroom with all of the personal attacks, let alone the anti-Bush liberal rhetoric flying around.

This is your post #625. Now this thread is over #900. I am in full agreement with you. Amazing.

[FairOpinion]

"Okay people argue if you will but you need to take a look at this list of jobs/companies that have left America."

===

The question to ask is WHY they had to go outside of the US to get the job done cost effectively.

The reason is that in the US companies are over regulated, and over taxed -- as a result of many years of Dem rule.

THAT is what needs to be changed, and the way to do that is to get rid of more and more Dems in Congress and other elected and appointed offices, including the judiciary.

[m1-lightning]

Cheers : )

[hedgetrimmer]

http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/

This is the link I searched.

It says USCODE.house.gov. The cgi-bin directory is uscode.

Here is the title of the page:
Search the United States Code
Office of the Law Revision Counsel

You are telling me the house of representatives search engine for the United States code is not searhcing the U S Code?


Here is another link

http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+uscnst+2+0++%28%27declaratio

It lists THE ORGANIC LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

If you click on the big blue -> at the top left of the page it displays the Declaration of Independence, the ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION, ORDINANCE OF 1787: THE NORTHWEST TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT, CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA - 1787,ANALYTICAL INDEX TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES .

These are the organic laws of the United States, put into the US code in 1898. Just like I said in my previous post.

[txdoda]

An alternative would be to get them to turn in businesspeople who hire them. Pay them a bounty of $20,000, with the money coming from the businessperson who hired them.>>>>>

Interesting Idea !! Also, 'quicker cash' for the illegal apposed to a lawsuit (wal-mart). Illegal could take his cash & go home & invest in his country.


Except that we have to do something about welfare, too. Can we do something about welfare, Mr. President?>>>>>>>>

MANDATORY drug testing for a start (no elderly/dia-abled).

[Jorge]

Here is someone who is from Mexico and feels this way because she loves what this country did for her and is proud to be an "American" now. What kind of kick in the behind do you imagine it is for her family and her to see the trespasser's breaking the law?! And being rewarded for it!

If I was so passionate about moving to America...I would be glad to see others share the same experience....and wouldn't be resentful of them just because they didn't cross all their "t's" and dot every "i" in the immigration process.

If I wanted other hispanics to escape poverty and enjoy prosperity in the USA I wouldn't be whining because they didn't suffer through the exact same process I went through.
I'd be happy for them.

[txdoda]

Two Congressman told them it was racial profiling and they could just turn around and get off. How do you like that?>>>>>

Sounds like TX needs two NEW critters to me......Who were they ??

[m1-lightning]

THAT is what needs to be changed, and the way to do that is to get rid of more and more Dems in Congress and other elected and appointed offices, including the judiciary

Emphasis added on the judiciary on another subject matter, I'm a little tired of the liberal courts handing out millions of dollars to lazy Americans who want to sue corporations for a living. It either drives down the wage earnings of the employees or transfers the costs to the consumers all just to benefit one person who didn't want to work for a living. Lazy spoiled Americans are the ones destroying America, not the so called "greedy" businessmen. The only way to stop the liberal courts is to make extreme conservative courts which the Senate Democrats have proved they won't let happen.

The answer? 60 Republican senators.

[Texasforever]

The question to ask is WHY they had to go outside of the US to get the job done cost effectively.

I take a bit more cynical view than that. They did it because they could. Both technology and law made it an irresistible business strategy and I would too if it meant meeting my fiduciary duties to maximize the profits of shareholders and business owners. Business is not in business to make jobs, it isn't even to make a product or render a service, business is not social service. Business is in business to make money. Business is amoral, the only restrictions they must hold legal restrictions. If I can legally have a widget manufactured for 50 cents in Mexico and it costs 50 dollars to produce in the United States due to unions, regulations or any other reason then I would be failing my ethical duty to the business I managed to pay the 50 bucks. It boggles my mind that that core conservative value is even questioned on this forum.

[Liberty Valance]

W'04 :^)

[m1-lightning]

references, references, references...

Here's the US Code containing the exact text laws WITHOUT the references:

US Code/Cornell Law Institute

and here: GPO Access

You can search both but will not find more than 7 instances in the text of these laws citing the 'Declaration of Independence'

[m1-lightning]

And if anyone prevented business from using foreigners to make their products, our ecomomy would go down the $hithole in competition with all of these domestic restrictions. Obvioiusly Clinton knew that or he would have stopped the companies form moving overseas. Clinton wasn't dumb to economics, he was just selfish in how he used it.

[Final Authority]

With respect to your reply #175, unfortunately I predict it will be Clark not Dean, after all, he is a Rhodes scholar and is vetted by the Council on Foreign Relations, like Clinton, and other members of the CFR like the Bush family, Carter and others. Funny thing is, the great Ronald Reagan would have nothing to do with the CFR. Neither would Pat Buchanan.

[m1-lightning]

You don't have a very high opinion of Americans do you? Many socialists that live in my area say the same thing and admonish us to give up our freedoms and rights so we can be more in tune with the rest of the world.

Obviously if you don't agree my 'unedited' comment about spoiled Americans, then you believe we are entitled to be rich no matter what education or experience you have. That in itself is the core belief of all liberals or communists, rather.

Do you believe all Americans are entitled to 4 weeks vacation, full medical and dental benefits, $30,000 minimum a year salary and a 401k no matter what job they hold?

[janetgreen]

I'm one of the 83%.

I am too. Savage might be rough around the edges, but he tells the truth.

[Final Authority]

Jay claims that in due course he will begin syndication. At one time he was web cast but it costs money and he stopped it. As he gets more popular in the Boston market the commercial spots are about half of the show. He's making a bundle being #1.

[MissAmericanPie]

I suspect people have lost something vital growing up in an age where reading between the lines and translating political double speak becomes a critical skill. Two plus two can no longer be counted on to equal four, they think there may be things going on behind the scenes of that math process that can effect the outcome.

People like me pay no attention to what is going on between the lines, what may or may not be going on behind the scenes, the deception, the sales pitch, the game, the smoke and mirrors and concentrate on cause and effect.

When socialism happens, nations collapse, doesn't matter how smart the people that are in charge of it believe themselves to be, or how they plan to prevent the historical destructive outcome by tweaking it, People like me and you know it will always end the same way.

The same thing with degrading our Constitution. Foolish politicians and elites consider the Constitution the security blanket of the ignorant masses, a blanket they need to be weaned away from. When in reality the Constitution is a fortress and a last refuge from the tyrant. It can't be weakened or ignored here an there and not form cracks in it's foundation and our protection.

It's the same with our sovereignty, one can not hold to a little sovereignty. The minute national interests, cultural interests, individual rights falls under the influence and authority of outside forces, there is an incredible net loss in all areas.

Some people are holding to the hope that Bush is a good man who has a plan up his sleeve that will benefit them. When it doesn't matter if he is good or evil, or if his sincere intention is to benefit the nation. I think he cares more for being percieved as the first unoffical President of the Western Hemisphere. His actions, his direction, no matter his intentions, has terrible consequences that cannot be mended without blood spilled.

They have been decieving themselves like that for three years now, out of fear, denial, ignorance of the outcome of cause and effect, because their concentration is not on cause and effect, but reading between the lines. It's like grabbing the hot end of a candle over and over and hoping for a different outcome each time. Lacking foresight is a real bad deal.

[MissAmericanPie]

Thanks JP. Where that it were different and I able to sing their praises. They have chosen their path and it's not mine. It's hard to realize that conservatives have no real representation in this nation.