Bush will win on Immigration to save the Republican Party.

[Pukin Dog]

Just a little dose of reality for some of you going nuts over the Immigration issue, because there is NO chance that you will win on the border enforcement issue. No chance whatsoever. Only after a migrant worker program passes, making most of these illegal aliens legal, is there any chance at all to have meaningful border enforcement.

Bush is not running for office anymore, but the Republican Congress is in need of a big victory in November. This issue will kill our chances to maintain the majority, and knowing that, Bush will likely veto any bill making illegal immigration a felony, if that bill does not include the migrant worker program (call it amnesty if you want) needed to hold onto Business and Hispanic support for the Republican Party.

The Illegal Immigration Genie is out of the bottle, folks. You can’t stuff her back in without losing the House and/or Senate in November. Pragmatic minds will rule in the end, and that is a bitter pill you best swallow now.

FReepers can’t will elections for the Republican Party, but we sure can go a long way towards losing them, if we can’t put our common sense ahead of our passions on this issue. I live in San Diego County, and I see the problems with illegal immigration on a daily basis.

Whether you like it or not, much of the commerce of this country does depend on these folks to do jobs that Americans won’t do for the prevailing wage.

So, you have a choice, you can demand the border enforcement bills on their own, or you can swallow hard and consider everything you will lose if we turn off 10-15% of the electorate, in addition to the business community that depends on these workers. Yeah, they broke the law, and so do the people who hire them.

So what?

Yeah, I said it, SO WHAT? The time to be worried about that was when there were REAL Republican majorities in the Border States. It is too late now. This is a problem that cannot be solved, but only managed.

It is possible to be right and stupid at the same time. Pete Wilson tried this a few years ago, got all kinds of support for it. It passed, and Pete Wilson is gone. Then a judge overturned it anyway. That is exactly what you can expect to happen with these current bills as well. Some judge will put an injunction on enforcement, but by the time that happens, we will be knee-deep into impeachment proceeding under a Democrat Congress.

Bush won’t let that happen, neither will smarter members of the Senate and House. You won’t win, you can’t win, but you can shoot yourself and the Republican party in the head (even if you are not a member) by pursuing a program that does not include amnesty or whatever you want to call it.

We lost this one.

Get over it. There are bigger battles ahead.

[arasina]

Of course, there does seem to be a whole lot of compassionate socialists like Bush on this site.

Compassionate socialists! That's it! It's entirely too true. No wonder I've lately begun questioning whether I'm on a so-called Conservative forum. The Left has won over the mushy middle without even 'firing a shot'.

[oldtimer2]

Pukin Dog, you are exactly right. Beyond what you said, if we sent 8-10 million workers home to Mexico, the American economy would crash worse than it did on Sept. 12, 2001.

We need some people to think about consequences.

[Marine Inspector]

So you are going to put a few million anchor babies in foster care?

You are being ridicules. These kids either go with the parents or they stay here with relatives or the other parent.

[logician2u]

Reading some of the replies you've received bears out my recent observation that many who call themselves conservatives think with their gut, not their brains as God intended.

Emotional impulses to propose our government do things contrary to traditional American values expressed in the Declaration of Independence indicate poor understanding of what this great nation once stood for: a beacon of freedom in a sea of tyranny.

Another failure of the government schools, without a doubt.

[processing please hold]

I was a soldier as well, and I would be up for a fight.

Thank you for your service. We are ready...scared...but ready.

I want this to end, and if it ends with violence, so be it.

So be it.

Just letting everyone know that the Ultimate Sacrifice may be required here. The United States of America IS worth dying for. 'Nuff said.

Many of us know it's worth fighting for. Agreed, 'nuff said.

[Protagoras]

I have a position, you just asked the wrong question. Your fault, not mine.

Nonsense, but I'll play,,what is your position.

[MineralMan]

OK, you are still spamming the forum with the same message. You've been asked by the moderators to stop. You're brand new here. I advise that you follow the moderators' suggestion if you want to stay.

[Spiff]

So you are going to put a few million anchor babies in foster care? I didn't think there was a big surplus of foster care homes, I guess I'm wrong.

So, the millions of parents of any sort of baby can get away with any sort of crime because of this? "I'm sorry, Judge, you can't lock me up for robbing that liquor store at gunpoint because I have a toddler at home." "I'm sorry, BP Agent Jones, you can't take me and deport me because I have a toddler at home." Same thing. They bottom line is that the invaders will take their children with them or find some other way to ensure that their child is cared for. This is not rocket science.

[Pukin Dog]

Unlike some of you, I go to great pains (though I fail sometimes) to not make these threads personal. When I post, I post about a particular subject, hoping to stir discussion about THE SUBJECT MATTER. If I address a particular FReeper, I try to be respectful. I sometimes fail at that, but if a subject is being discussed, I try to make my comments about the SUBJECT, not about the FReeper. I have learned that it is of no value to anyone to attack the messenger. As you have seen, it is only destructive. I get no special treatment here, and if I were to follow FReepers from thread to thread with the only purpose being to attack said FReeper, I think I would get banned real quick.

That said, ANY FReeper that does not want me to post or respond to them, need only say so. I am not here for any reason other than to discuss current events. I am not here to make friends. I give my opinion (just like anyone else) and participate in discussion about the issue. That way, I avoid looking foolish, as though my opinion was gospel.

If I use a FReeper's handle in a response, I will use it as it is, or in a playful affectation like "the peachy one" for Peach, or something like that. I don't play silly personal games with FReepers, because I come here to learn and share, not bask in the glow of my opinion.

Is that clear?

[Bikers4Bush]

Just curious to know how "a beacon of freedom in a sea of tyranny" translates into come illegals one and all, feel free to ignore our laws and live off the government.

Because personally, I don't see the correlation.

[samcgwire]

"Executing WOT. Overthrew two tyrannical and dangerous regimes, liberating 50 million people worldwide."

Being that you threw that into this thread, and that being what this Admin has left to hang its hat on:

How free are those people? They're free to be good Death Cult Mohammedans or else they get stoned, hung or torn to bits in their Islamic Republics that we sanctioned for them.

[Miss Marple]

Children of people in prison usually live with the parent who is NOT incarcerated. In cases where both parents are missing, the children live with grandparents or go into foster care. And guess what all those children get: welfare money.

So, you would split up families and increase the welfare payments and make even more problems.

The issue is complicated, and cavalier answers are not helping the discussion.

Let me add one other thing to this discussion. There's lots of talk about evil ol Vicente Fox. Apparently people don't realize he was the pro-American, more conservative candidate in Mexico's last election, and was a surprise winner. The Mexican National Assembly (and that is probably not the right name for it) is controlled by the other party, which spends most of its time thinking of ways to make Fox look bad and ranting about the gringos to the north. The next Mexican election is this year, and Fox isn't running...the Mexican president only gets one 6-year term.

So, in less than a year there will be an eloection, and the favored candidate is the other party, which is the one which has held power in Mexico for most of my lifetime. They are the ones who nationalized their oil and gas corporations, to give you an idea of what we are facing.

So, we need to get a reasonable solution done now, because in less than a year we won't have Vicente Fox leading Mexico, but someone who is more likely to invite Chavez for a state visit and make illegal immigration a patriotic duty and probably give the illegals spending money and a bus ticket to the border.

[Pukin Dog]

BTW, PD on a previous thread you admitted to hiring illegals to work around your home. I would say you are slightly biased

If bias is having an opinion, then I guess I would plead guilty to that.

[CowboyJay]

"Again...I don't mind this if more are actually doing something. However, the agents at the border wouldn't solve the problem of deporting the 20,000,000 already in the country."

Once again. Slowly. These criminals came here and broke the laws because there was money to be had in doing so. Go after the employers, deny entitlements, and that goes away. Most will go willingly.

[cdbull23]

It was no Nazi reference, more of an abortion reference.

As to whether or not we "reward" the children of criminals, I would argue that banning abortions in ALL cases (including rape) rewards the child of the rapist by giving him the right to life, which he is most definitely entitled to. As we know, there are many who think pregnancies resulting from rape are "less valid" than others.

I think you're right in arguing that we should prevent illegals from giving birth in the USA; however, if a child is born here, I would argue that he deserves the chance to stay.

[samcgwire]

"Two outstanding confirmations to the United States Supreme Court"

You forgot the "just trust me" Harriet Miers debacle.

[Beagle8U]

"You are being ridicules. These kids either go with the parents or they stay here with relatives or the other parent."

That works deporting a few thousand, not millions.

I'm being rational about the problem, not ridiculous.

[Pukin Dog]

Nice try at damage control.

Sometimes, damage control is all you've got to work with.

[GarySpFc]

If bias is having an opinion, then I guess I would plead guilty to that.

Let's say by bias you have a guilty opinion. :)

[MineralMan]

"So, the millions of parents of any sort of baby can get away with any sort of crime because of this? "I'm sorry, Judge, you can't lock me up for robbing that liquor store at gunpoint because I have a toddler at home." "I'm sorry, BP Agent Jones, you can't take me and deport me because I have a toddler at home." Same thing. They bottom line is that the invaders will take their children with them or find some other way to ensure that their child is cared for. This is not rocket science."

---

Exactly. The child is a U.S. citizen. Get him/her a U.S. passport, then take him/her with you back to Mexico. Renew the passport when needed at the local US embassy or consulate.

Then, when the child is 18 years of age, he/she can come into the United States of America perfectly legally.

It's either that or leave the kid with some legal relative or make it a ward of the court.