White House verifies immigration review

The Washington Times ^ | December 12, 2003 | Jerry Seper

[yonif]

The White House yesterday said a new immigration review is under way that could lead to amnesty for millions of illegal aliens living and working in the United States.

Confirmation of the review came during a White House briefing, just two days after Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said during a town hall meeting in Miami that the government had to "afford some kind of legal status" to the 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens in the country.

[verity]

Damed right. I say fence off California and forcibly move all illegals there. ;~)

[At _War_With_Liberals]

The scare of amnesty will make McCain's bill look tough, and Bushbots will support it.

[freeangel]

This is it for me too! I'm so mad I could scream. I WILL NOT vote for any bunch of jerks that foster the destruction of this country and this administration seems hell bent on doing this through its "immigration" policies.

[NMC EXP]

Actually, I'll vote for him, but I won't excuse every wrong or stupid thing he does because of it.

That is a self refuting statement.

Regards

J.R.

[Varda]

If what you say is true, then Bush is pandering on the assumption that "hispanics" care less about issues important to all Americans then about enlarging the ethnic group. Talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations.

[BiteMedems]

GOP dropping all the bombs this week to guage reaction... well before the election.



I concur completely. These are hot and very complex issues, but these moves really appear to politically motivated.

[JustPiper]

No! No! No! I will write in Dan Stein's name then, for much as I want to I could not in good conscience vote for "W"

[JustPiper]

Mr. Ridge, during a question-and-answer period after his Miami speech, said he would not support granting citizenship to illegal aliens now in the country "because they violated the law to get here," but the government needed to "determine how you can legalize their presence" and then institute an immigration enforcement policy to prevent future illegal entries.

What is this, yes or no?!

[JustPiper]

What is wrong with our President EW?

[P.O.E.]

A further expansion of the scope of transfer-payment-three-card-monte is NOT a step in the right direction, IMHO.

[txdoda]

If I recall, the intention was that local PD's checking NCIC (as they do every time they run a radio check) would ID and apprehend these 300,000 scofflaws.

Haven't heard one single word of this since the big press conference that day.>>>>>>


Tancredo spoke of these scofflaws just last week........TWO yrs. after 9-11 we still have OVER 300k, already ordered DEPORTED, running loose in the country.

[Dane]

What is wrong with our President EW?

What is wrong with a President trying to solve a problem. Do you seriously think you can round up 8 million people and kick them out?

Look our borders have been lax for a long time. From Kennedy to Reagan to Clinton.

Sabertooth has stated that building a wall would be a $100 billion a year venture.

What is your solution?

[Dane]

What is wrong with trying to capture the hispanic vote. The vast majority are hard working, religious, and family oriented.

[txdoda]

Bush is a 'work in progress.' Basically, he has 2 passions: the war on terrorism and getting the hispanic vote. >>>>>>>


Memo to Bush.......Promises & Pandering didn't "get the hispanic vote" in CA.

[HennepinPrisoner]

NO! If President Bush proposes an amnesty for illegal aliens, I'm sitting out the election next November. Americans don't want one.

I won't sit it out....if Wesley Clark or Howard Dean takes a harsher stance on immigration than Jorge Bush, a Democrat will get my vote in 2004.

I am sick and tired of the GOP pandering to a base that overwhelmingly supports the opposition party....all in the name of paying back their business campaign contributors.

[thoughtomator]

This seems to be being done under the theory that if they can enrage conservatives sufficiently now, by election day it will all blow over.

I am unsure if there is merit to that proposition. I don't think that if things proceed along the current vector that the groups that mobilized heavily to vote for Bush in 2000 will be anywhere close to motivated in 2004.

[familyofman]

"What is wrong with trying to capture the hispanic vote. The vast majority are hard working, religious, and family oriented."

There's also about 8 - 12 million of them that are criminals. Criminals, that's right illegally entering this country is a criminal offense. Let's knock off the nicey-nice words & call them what they are - criminals. If any candidate from any party thinks I will vote for someone that endorses/encourages illegal behavior - they are dead wrong.
Hispanic/latino, whatever should be preceeded by criminal - face the facts & call them what they are.

[Area51]

I suggest they formulate a coherent policy, otherwise it's nothing less than dereliction of duty.


21 posted on 12/12/2003 12:47:07 AM PST by primeval patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]

---

Oh they have. It's called screw your base, They won't leave. They got RINOS in congress writting legislation, and while there will be parts of it he claim proudly he doesn't agree with he will sign a bill into law.
And his mouthpieces will claim that he didn't dare veto it because of fear of Democratic critizism, and besides the USSC will throw it out.

All part of the Master Compassionate Conservative Party platform.

That or they don't have a f#cking clue what the term Conservative means.! I Think the recent gamble of CFR pretty much has answered that question.

Now ask yourself what will they do, when he is re-elected and he doesn't have to worry about losing voters?

Oh yeah, You aint seen nothing yet!

[Dane]

Hispanic/latino, whatever should be preceeded by criminal - face the facts & call them what they are.

Rhetoric like that pushes hard working and family oriented hispanics(legal ones who were born here) right into the arms of Hillary.