DUMPING CONSERVATIVES AT THE BORDER

Laura's Weekly E-Blast ^ | 1/8/2004 | LAURA INGRAHAM

[kellynla]

I am beginning to think John McCain actually won the presidency in 2000.

Conservatives were relieved when the Straight Talk Express petered out during the 2000 primary season. John McCain, although tough on national security and runaway spending, was hardly a conservative on major issues such as campaign finance, healthcare reform and immigration.

Yet this is exactly where we find President Bush today (except unlike McCain, Bush doesn’t seem to have much of a problem with runaway spending). Last year President George Bush signed the McCain-Feingold bill into law, which is one of the worst assaults on political speech this country has ever seen. When conservatives (and many liberals) howled, the President’s advisers whispered that they believed the Supreme Court would “clean up” the more onerous parts of the bill which dictates the types of political ads that can air before a general election or primary contest. Of course the Supreme Court rubber stamped the entire thing and so the result is less, not more political speech in the U.S.

And now President Bush charges across the landscape to rescue us from our “unfair” and “broken” immigration system by rewarding people who came here illegally with the promise of legal status. This proposal essentially mirrors the immigration legislation sponsored by—you got it—Sen. McCain. Under the Bush/McCain plan, anyone outside the U.S. who wants to come into the country would only need to show proof of a “job offer” in order to get an initial three-year work permit that would be renewable for an unspecified period. Such temporary workers could also bring family members here. What prevents these people from staying on beyond their time premitted for "temporary" work? As it stands now, there seems to be no limit on the immigration —temporary or permanent— allowed under this plan. And as for the claim that this would be a big boon to the American economy? Illegal immigration costs taxpayers $20 billion each year, in extra education, healthcare, welfare, and prison costs. Today thirty-four percent of Mexicans legally in the U.S., and 25 percent of Mexicans illegally here are welfare.

How are those costs diminished under the Bush plan?

Most bewildering is the Administration idea that this plan is necessary for homeland security reasons. On the contrary, it would not be surprising if some would-be terrorists are among the millions of illegals who will become “documented” under the Bush plan. As Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) charged, "Guest worker programs and gradual amnesty provide cover for terrorists."

It’s easy to understand why Vicente Fox, McCain, big business, and La Raza are happy this week—but what’s in this new proposal for working class American families? How about those immigrants who a lot of time and money to comply with our immigration laws?

The real answer is absolutely nothing. The only reasonable prediction is that wages for a wide range of jobs will be kept artificially depressed by outside workers—now with “legal status” will work for peanuts. “I have worked construction for 30 years as a truck driver (18-wheeler),” wrote one of my listeners, “And every year my pay has gone down because Mexicans are flooding the trucking industry…."

When Bill Clinton says we live in an “increasingly borderless world,” we’re not surprised. It’s the usual globaloney blather. But when a Republican president advocates a policy that will make our borders effectively meaningless, we should be outraged.

With his approval numbers high, President Bush has made a devil’s bargain with business and Hispanic groups. Elites from both parties are ignoring the view of a strong majority of Americans that we need to stop illegal immigration, not high-five it.

Another listener wonders: “What happened to the ‘party of principle’? More like the party of pandering. Considering the massive numbers involved, this amnesty being floated really is Pandora's Box, once opened cannot be closed.”

President Bush has now done the equivalent of posting a sign at the border: “Help Wanted for $5.15/hour.”

Conservatives are right to be disappointed in President Bush. We are right to ignore the Administration’s promise that this time, non-amnesty amnesty will be good for the American people. Our citizenship and legal residence should be reserved for people who love this country enough that breaking her laws—whether at the border or on the street—is out of the question. The next time I hear from his Administration that it is doing all it can to protect our homeland, secure our borders, and increase our standard of living, I will laugh.

Now I know the definition of “compassionate conservative:” a person who campaigns as a conservative, then sells out key conservative principles.

[Peace will be here soon]

Do you have any idea if they'll be on the ballot in Mo. for the 2004 election?

---

I do believe I recall a Constitution Party candidate being on the ballot the last Pres. election. From what I could gather from the website, there should be one on the ballot in Missouri in 2004. I am just starting to look into this Party though, so I can`t say for sure. But like I said, I like what I see so far.

[NewRomeTacitus]

40% Democrat still makes 60% of the citizens of Cuban descent non-Democrat. Your spelling, like your math, is also showing signs of wear.

You know Kelly already told you his sex. Referring to him as "girlfriend" is either insulting or a Freudian slip of wish fulfillment.

Good night.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Your reading is about as sharp as your wit.

I said that 40% of the Cuban-American population voted for CLINTON in his runs at the presidency, but 80% voted for Bush II because of the Elian Gonzalez fiasco.

Keep up with the debate, or go hang out at nick.com.

Are you kelly's guy?

[Joe Hadenuf]

LOL, LOL, LOL! Tam, you've out done yourself! That is GOOD. Falling Sky Productions. Keep that handy. You'll need to repost it OFTEN.

I'm confident no one is laughing at that silly image.

I have learned here that when someone is shinning the light of truth at their party or candidate, damage control kicks in and they generally resort to displaying stupid cartoons and silly images.

This is no laughing matter. I have seen *hundreds* of post from strong Bush supporters that are no longer supporting this President over this.

All that sky is falling crap no longer has any punch.

As many now feel that not only did the sky fall, their President completely let them down, and displayed his true colors.

It's a very sad day. Nothing to laugh about.

[Peace will be here soon]

What's that I hear, is it mutiny in the ranks?

---

I seem to remember Pres. Bush was going to be a uniter , not a divider ! LOL !!

[Missouri]

It's nothing but slow motion, incremental amnesty.

Sure seems like it. IMHO I don't think it will get through the House of Reps. At least I sure hope it doesn't.

[txdoda]

The conservatives are mad down here in Florida.>>>>>>

You should hear the conservatives here in TX, for that matter the dems too.

As the numerous polls show Americans (of all paries) want the illegals 'booted' & immigration brought to a 'controlable' level.

Gov't has proven time & again they cannot monitor mass immigration, nor can the taxpayers afford it.

[Beck_isright]

"Gov't has proven time & again they cannot monitor mass immigration, nor can the taxpayers afford it."

We could if we would enforce the laws against employers. That's the achilles heel. But since the Imperial Senate could care less unless you pay the side homage and honors to them, we will simply invite the Goths in to destroy the Republic from within.

[Missouri]

I am just starting to look into this Party though

I thought I've seen them on the ballot here too. I visited their web site and they don't seem to bad. I'm very much divided on how to vote right now. We'll just see what developes between now and then.

[Luis Gonzalez]

I am in favor of any measure that will address this issue in an orderly, intelligent manner.

Whether I am opposed to hiring illegals or not really matters very little, because I am in no position to hire illegal aliens, obviously, there are many people who don't have a problem with doing it, otherwise the problem would not exist.

I think that we need to take steps to rectify the situation, and do so to our advantage. I see a great deal of economic benefits to the hiring of migrant workers, I believe in the positive effect of good immigration.

The first thing I think we have to deal with, is the fact that there are (reportedly) ten million illegal aliens living (and working) in the U.S., roughly half of them are Mexicans. Their presence needs to be addressed, and in while saying "deport them" is easy, doing it is a nearly impossible, No one has actually offered up any ideas on how to find, detain, and deport ten million people who have woven themselves into our society.

So yes, I support Bush idea of allowing for their coming out of the underbelly of society by granting them some sort of temporary legal status because it will encourage their returning home...most of these people would rather be a little wealthy back in Mexico as a result of having earned some money, than dirt poor and hated here.

Even if this plan only reduces the illegal population by half, it's worth it.

Bush also mentioned stepping up border security, a point being totally ignored by most around these parts.

Now, I think that the Bush proposal falls short of the mark because it failed to address the defense of our borders.

But, my definition of defending our borders is not the ridiculous one being thrown around in here, my definition of defending our border is to help Mexico's economy prosper to the point where Mexicans would be able to work at home and earn money.

I think that Bush's next step should be to expand NAFTA, and provide specific incentives for the economic development of Mexico's central and southern States, the region that most of our current illegals emanate from, and to help Mexico attain a 6% economic growth (half of China's current growth rate) yearly.

You see, our borders are not some imaginary line on a map that no one can actually see, the nations that border us, Canada and Mexico ARE our borders, and in protecting them, and helping them realize economic growth, we help our own cause.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"As the numerous polls show Americans (of all paries) want the illegals 'booted' & immigration brought to a 'controlable' level."

We hated Clinton because he governed according to the polls, and hate Bush because he doesn't.

[txdoda]

We could if we would enforce the laws against employers. That's the achilles heel. >>>>>>

ROTFLMAS.......In Nov. the 'verification hot-line' went nation wide for employers to verify SS #'s.....however the bill passed & was signed by GWB & it's set up to be VOLUNTARILY done.

Does this *sound* like ANYONE in DC cares about catching illegal employees or employers??

[NewRomeTacitus]

So humble. As if the entire election turned on the photograph of the kid with the muzzle in his face. "Flyover" America made its choice clear and the courts had to acknowledge it. No minority community held the ultimate result of that election, not even the overseas military votes that were "overlooked" until long after the final decision was rendered.

I have not, nor ever had sexual relations with that Kelly fellow. That may depend on what your definition of what the word "is" is. If I only had half the wit that you do.

[Itzlzha]

"Deport them"

First, you must find them.

How?

Welfare,Social Services, Multi-Lingual Translators, PUBLIC SCHOOLS, Emergency Room attendance (have INS at the emergency rooms used most often), Profiling (They ARE Criminals, after all...), Employment records, Re-Certifying Soc Security numbers and addresses, those "Check Cashing" clearinghouses, cease ALL $$$ transfers to Mexico unless ID is verified, and they have a valid Green Card/Visa...I'm just warming up!

What's you answer besides a welcome mat and more welfare $$$ from MY pocket?

[Tamzee]

Falling Sky Productions.

Yep... it just seemed so perfect somehow ;-)

[Beck_isright]

" Does this *sound* like ANYONE in DC cares about catching illegal employees or employers??"

Nope. Thus my series of quotations from The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. I call it suggested readings for all conservatives now.

[SerpentDove]

>>Their presence needs to be addressed, and in while saying "deport them" is easy, doing it is a nearly impossible, No one has actually offered up any ideas on how to find, detain, and deport ten million people who have woven themselves into our society.<<

Not being contentious with you, your answers are well-reasoned, and I appreciate a reasonable discussion as I try to sort things out myself.

But it seems to me that this issue should be addressed before we invite untold more into the country to follow suit.

>>So yes, I support Bush idea of allowing for their coming out of the underbelly of society by granting them some sort of temporary legal status because it will encourage their returning home...<<

This bothers me too...we are talking about illegals who it seems to me would have little incentive to be come forward and be fingerprinted , I.D.'d, and have their mugshots taken so they can be identified later. After all, why do that, when they can obviously cross the borders already, and without paying any taxes or answering to Uncle Sam.

It doesn't add up.

[Tamzee]

You weren't going to vote for Dubya anyways, were you? And you spend so much time trying to convince others to stop supporting Bush, I would have thought you'd be celebrating today much as the Palestinians did on 9/11.

[Luis Gonzalez]

We're not inviting untold more to come...unless they have a job, and if they do, let them come, but we are giving those already here an opportunity to gain some sort of legal status, and a way to come in from the dark.

I think many will take the offer.

By the way, illegal aliens do pay taxes, billions of dollars a year in taxes.

Again, even of this only works for a percentage of the total illegal population, it's a win-win.

It's a beginning.

[SerpentDove]

There are LOTS of Bush voters who are very disappointed today. I would guess a majority, but I don't know.

I know a majority of Freepers who took the poll on the home page are disappointed.