Bush Gives Country Away

WND.com | 01-15-03 | Farah, Joseph

[Theodore R.]

Bush gives country away

Posted: January 15, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

President Bush's plan to legalize 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens – maybe considerably more – is one of the most irresponsible, dangerous, reckless proposals to come out of Washington in my lifetime.

And that's saying a lot.

In my lifetime, I have witnessed:

wage-and-price controls imposed by Richard Nixon;

the greatest expansion of unconstitutional, immoral wealth-transfer programs in the history of our country;

the use of the Internal Revenue Service by President Clinton to harass and intimidate political adversaries;

the sacrifice of more than 50,000 U.S. servicemen in a war they would not be allowed to win;

the shredding of the Constitution in a thousand ways to bring us to the point at which politicians no longer even question the limits of the federal government;

the transfer by President Clinton of sensitive technology with military applications to a budding superpower for campaign cash;

the demoralization and emasculation of the country under President Carter;

I watched all this and more in nearly a half-century of life. But, honestly, President Bush's proposal to legalize untold millions of illegal aliens is potentially worse than any of these blunders, any of these mistakes, any of these abuses.

Why?

First, because it is immoral. Bush claims this is the "compassionate" thing to do. But he is misusing the term "compassion" the same way do those who would most like to unseat him from power. There is nothing compassionate about inflicting pain on others, in hurting the country, while accepting none of the responsibility, nor pain, nor sacrifice yourself. This move will not materially affect George W. Bush's life. But it will impact those competing for jobs at the lower end of the economic ladder. It will impact those who live in crime-plagued areas of the country and who don't have Secret Service protection. It will impact those who chose to obey the laws rather than flout them as their first act in America.

Second, it is unconstitutional. The federal government has few and limited areas of responsibility in our republican system of government. Among those clearly defined areas are the defense of the nation and the defense of our borders. This act is a reprehensible betrayal of the president's oath of office to uphold the law and execute it.

Third, it is bad policy. Even the simple act of proposing this notion encourages more illegal immigration into our country. More foreigners will want to get in on the action. It sends a horrible signal that America doesn't really believe in enforcing its laws. It promotes chaos at our borders and crime in our streets.

Fourth, it risks national security. Presumably, there was a reason this president placed the Immigration and Naturalization Service under the Department of Homeland Defense. The American people assume it was because he finally recognized that out-of-control immigration is a real threat – especially at a time when terrorists are trying desperately to kill and maim as many of us as possible.

It's not strong enough to call Bush's proposal "irresponsible." It is borderline seditious. And there is a widespread perception he is making this move because he believes there is personal political gain in it.

That is hardly "compassion," Mr. President. That is the worst kind of cynicism. That is the worst kind of selfishness. That is the worst kind of example a leader could set for the nation.

Shame on Bush. Shame on his party for standing by quietly as he sets out to destroy the fabric of our nation. Shame on the opposition for suggesting his move doesn't go far enough. Shame on all Americans who lie down and accept this outrage from Washington.

[raybbr]

He spends the entire article ranting against the President's plan without making any suggestion at all about an alternative.

Why does he need an alternative. There are hundreds of existing laws that should be followed. Your hyperbole is wasted here. He's complaining about the proposal. The alternative is to enforce the existing laws.

[ought-six]

"Also Mexico isn't exporting terrorism, that's a fact. Mid-east islamofacsits are."

What the f**k do you call the drug trade and narco-terrorism?????? And what about the Mexican officials who were smuggling Islamists across the border? Mexico is not a friend of the U.S., and never has been.

[Modernman]

I'd be willing to employ that process AS AN INITIAL step. But then, more drastic measures will likely be necessary.

Why? We'll never get the number of illegals down to zero and after a while you hit the point of diminishing returns when it comes to effort. If we get the number of illegals down to less than five million within a decade, that would be a major victory.

[ought-six]

"That's not dealing with Mexico. That's surrendering to Mexico."

Yup.

[RebelBanker]

Per a Fox News article I linked to earlier, enforcing existing laws is not working very well. This appears to be due to a combination of inadequate enforcement resources and legal difficulties in prosecution.

I think we need some kind of major-scale work on our immigration laws. I have seen some really interesting ideas here and a few that I consider nutty. However, I think we all tend to agree that the status quo is not acceptable, so we need to do something. The debate is centered on what to do.

[ought-six]

Why? Because they don't belong here. They will belong here when they come here legally, like my mother did.

[skeeter]

Dane, you delusional.

Yes, but he boasts a neatly coifed yard & a VERY clean toilet.

[riri]

LOL. Awful defensive about little kids opinions on adult matters. Wouldn't be that you really are posting from mom and dad's basement as I summized all along.

I knew you were a little kid.

[Thorin]

This is a simple matter of defending our borders. If Lee and Jackson had thought the way you do, the Civil War wouldn't have lasted very long. If we don't have the stomach to defend our laws because we're afraid of how the enforcement will look on TV, we won't last very long as a nation either.

Besides, as others here have pointed out, we don't necessarily need mass deportations. By enforcing employer sanctions, we eliminate the incentive to come here, and many will simply go home on their own. Bush, of course, is sending precisely the opposite signal.

[Carry_Okie]

There is no easy solution, but I hope smarter people than me are working on the problem.

The point is, the President's plan, as proposed, is an unworkable and expensive amnesty that will only make the structural injustices in both America and source countries worse. It is destructive to our ability to raise a highly skilled workforce capable of generating the wealth necessary to support our national defense. Unless the people of America can maintain soveriegnty over the borders of this nation, and control of its composition, citizenship and voting become meaningless, and therewith go the Constitution's promise to guarantee unalienable rights.

There can be no compromise on that issue. Illegals MUST go home and apply for entry from their own countries or any systemic fix we might devise is rendered a cynical joke.

[TheDon]

You have proven yourself a better commentator than Farah. For that I commend you! You have provided an alternative to the President's plan.

Remember that it is only because President Bush took the initiative on this issue that Congress will now attempt to seriously address it. A national dialogue on this issue has begun. It is long overdue. What form the solution will take has yet to be decided. Some where between open borders and amnesty, and closed borders and mass round ups and deportations, various solutions exists.

[Reagan Man]

PresReagan's signoff on the 1986 amnesty legislation, Public Law: 99-603, was well intented but didn't get the job done. It was a bad policy decision that failed and we don't need to repeat the same mistake again. The world changed on 9-11 and both amnesty and open borders don't improve US security issues one iota. PresBush`s proposal grants legal status to illegal aliens. That is an act of pardon and that is in effect, amnesty. Bush`s proposal also dosen't call for sealing the borders and without sealing the borders, illegal immigration will continue and compound an already bad situation.

[raybbr]

Per a Fox News article I linked to earlier, enforcing existing laws is not working very well. This appears to be due to a combination of inadequate enforcement resources and legal difficulties in prosecution.

Could it be that for the past ten years we have had no concerted effort to enforce our existing laws? What if we really started? Couldn't we throw some real resources into enforcement? I bet that would stem the influx and then we could work on deporting them. First offer them the chance to go home with no questions asked. Only then could they get any kind of work permit. Then, those that stayed would be prosecuted and barred, after deportation, of ever coming back.

The one thing about this issue is that it has been turned into a cultural issue due to the fact that all we are discussing is hispanics. Aren't there many others that should deserve the same chance as they? This is one reason this rankles me so much and it is clear this is a political move on Bush's part. If he were truly interested in being a compassionate president on immigration he would be talking about Poles, Russians, Asians, etc. as well.

[Theodore R.]

What chance does this REALLY have of happening anyway? Any thoughts?

About the same likelihood as the "No Child Left Behind" Act and the McCain-Feingold Act!!!! And about as useful -- even more destructive.

[Truth29]

Actually, the status quo is better than a proposal and debate that will serve as an enticement for even more illegal immigration. If we don't tighten our borders significantly during this debate, we will have a great surge in illegals as they try to get here to benefit from the coming "amnesty" IMHO.

[jimt]

I guess you know your turds, you seem to like to spread them around on FR.

Ah, the old ad hominem reply. How inventive !

Of course, there is the old one about not being able to tell s**t from Shinola - and apparently you can't.

[azhenfud]

"Also Mexico isn't exporting terrorism, that's a fact."

Prolly a moot issue, but Mexico's "share" of illegaliens topped 69% of all illegals estimated to be in the US as of 2000. That's terrorism to the standard of living hard working Americans, native or legal immigrant, have built.

It is estimated some $40 billion worth of taxpayer funds are spent on Illegaliens annually. We, the American taxpayer should seek retributions of $25-27 billion annually from Mexico's exchange with the US, some 69% of the $40 billion.

[jaime1959]

Bravo, Joe Farah. Of course, most of the Pubbie sheeple here will not say that Farah is a liberal Democrat or something of the sort.

[jaime1959]

Bravo, Joe Farah. Of course, most of the Pubbie sheeple here will not say that Farah is a liberal Democrat or something of the sort.

[Hillarys nightmare]

"Just for starters, how about a systematic deportation of ALL said illegal invaders, a systemic registry, seriously enforcing the borders, and heavily penalizing employers who hire illegal invaders?"

Right on ! But the problem here is that the federal legislators are buying the argument by certain business men who just happen to be "major political donors", that these Alien workers are doing jobs that Americans refuse to do. LIES!!!!!!!!!!

Americana's just can't afford to work for next to nothing, and expect to support their families and themselves.
The Cost of cheap produce and cheap products, are killing American opportunity and American Business. Thus the American dream is becoming more elusive for most Americans

It's next to imposable for a Democratic free market society, to compete with the captive work force of a communist state owned market, which is what is driving all this in the first place! Therefore; if Americans won't work cheap, and the company can't move it's operations, then bus in the exploitable aliens!

If what I am saying is not true, then why is it forcasted that by 2005 over 50% of all manufacturing in the world will be coming from a province in China?

By the way: How is it that a Chinese owned Company is operating on our shores in South Carolina? The name of the company is "Haier LTD", and they manufacture refrigerator components.

Did you ever think you'd see the day that a communist government would set up a factory on our shores?