GOP platform pushes amnesty

NJ.com ^ | 8/29/04 | Paul Mulshine

[Afronaut]

If there are any deluded souls out there who still believe George W. Bush is a conservative, I invite them to examine the 2004 Republican Party platform on the issue of amnesty for illegal immigrants.

Bush is for it. That makes him a liberal. Worse, he proclaims that the amnesty is not an amnesty. So he is not only a liberal, but a liar as well.

[Guillermo]

He's doing OK on the WoT, other than leaving the borders open.

I never said he was as bad as Ted Kennedy, but he has done some really offensive things, such as gutting the First Amendment.

[Barlowmaker]

Describe your enhanced world in a Kerry Administration dougherty.

Where you are young, handsome, successful and loved.

[joesbucks]

and cracking down on illegal immigration is one of them.

How can you be so sure? It's not been top of mind in this administration so far. And sure, terorism and Iraq have been a distraction. But I don't think that's going to change anytime soon. And leaky borders should have already been a terrorism issuea already.

[valkyrieanne]

Maybe if we didn't have illegals running around the country, people would have *more children* to do some of this domestic/yard work at home.

[Guillermo]

I'll take Dana Rohrabacher's word for it (CNN Transcript):

My next guest says a government proposal to give Social Security benefits to illegal aliens would cause a financial crisis in this country. The proposal would include not only illegal aliens, but anyone working in violation of their visa, and could cost the United States hundreds of billions of dollars. Now Congressman Dana Rohrabacher has written a bill to derail the proposal, and he joins us to talk more on this issue. Thank you, Congressman Rohrabacher, for joining us.

I hate to paraphrase the measure, but it would basically give Social Security benefits to people who are not legal workers here in the United States, wouldn't it?

REP. DANA ROHRABACHER (R), CALIFORNIA: That's precisely correct. What we've done -- it's even worse actually. What it does is a totalization agreement with Mexico, which says that a Mexican who comes here and works -- let me check my figures here -- only has to work six quarters in order to be eligible for a Social Security benefit while an American citizen at the same time has to work 40 quarters in order to be eligible for Social Security.

Again, we are actually treating our own people worse than we're treating someone who's come here illegally. And I think it's quite apropos. We have this story right after you started talking about endemics that may be coming here from other countries. People who come here illegally also carry diseases. This is a catastrophe. Hopefully, the fact that they're now attacking Social Security should wake the American people up to -- that we got to do something about it. And the elite in this country are taking us down exactly the wrong road.

[Southack]

Dana's got it wrong. SSA says *legal* workers. How many illegal workers are paying in to SS, anyway?!

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/pr/USandMexico-pr.htm

SOCIAL SECURITY

News Release

United States and Mexico Sign Social Security Agreement

Agreement to Benefit U.S. Workers and Employers

(Printer friendly version)

Jo Anne Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security, signed an agreement today with Dr. Santiago Levy Algazi, Director General, Mexican Social Security Institute, that will remove from U.S. citizens working for U.S. companies in Mexico the burden of paying social security taxes to both countries. The agreement also will remove the double taxation requirement for Mexican citizens working for Mexican companies in the United States. “This agreement eliminates a serious and unnecessary impediment to American and Mexican businesses and their employees,” Commissioner Barnhart stated. “Just as important, it promotes equity and fairness for workers who divide their careers between our two countries.”

Currently, U.S. companies that employ U.S. citizens in Mexico are required to contribute to both the U.S. and Mexican social security systems. When the agreement takes effect, U.S. and Mexican employers and their employees will contribute to either the U.S. or Mexican social security systems, but not both. This will result in approximately 3,000 U.S. workers and their employers sharing in tax savings of $140 million over the first five years of the agreement.

The agreement also will improve social security protection for people who work in both countries. At present, some workers who have divided their careers between the United States and Mexico fail to qualify for social security benefits from one or both countries because they do not meet minimum eligibility requirements. Under the agreement it will be possible for workers and their family members to qualify for pro-rated U.S. or Mexican benefits based on combined credits from both countries. This will result in approximately 50,000 U.S. and Mexican workers receiving benefits after the first five years of the agreement.

[Guillermo]

Remember, Bush wants to make the Illegal workers Legal.

[Southack]

"This will result in approximately 50,000 U.S. and Mexican workers receiving benefits after the first five years of the agreement."

Surely you don't think that there are only 50,000 illegals, right (so this is more evidence that it only applies to *legal* workers)?!

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[Southack]

"Remember, Bush wants to make the Illegal workers Legal."

See Post #42.

5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[Guillermo]

Liek I said, if Bush has his way, the Illegals will become Legals.

That's one reason why they're flooding in here...They heard they may be made legal. Another "unintended consequence" (or is it?).

I surely hope no Mohammedan terrorists have snuck through the sieve we call the southern Border.

[Guillermo]

At least you didn't try to defend the most odious of the Bush bills, "Campaign Finance Reform."

[Barlowmaker]

such as gutting the First Amendment.

We wish. Grow up buddy. This bullcrap is no longer acceptable.

You don't like George W. Bush. I'm sure the Bush-Cheney 2004 campaign is under a "Magenta Alert" at this news. Yes, the frogmen are run-waddling through the lobby outside "Chief's" office.

So, you come here to bust the Bush record of betrayal. Especially at his despotic campaign to deprive you from your 1st Amendment right to be a whiny little beyayach. Well, it's now up to you tell the group how your world will improve under a John F'n Kerry reign of terror. If you can't, you should really ST heck U. It's thsa annoying thang bout your approach I mentioned earlier.

The tortured border wedgies around here need to present a superior political alternative along with all their tales of injury and woe. Hurt and proactive healing, that's what adults do. Just to show the integrity of their approach.*

* Yeah, and the cow will, actually, jump over the moon.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

[Guillermo]

The Campaign Finance Reform bill guts the First Amendment. Even the authors of the Bill admitted such. Their rationale was essentially "we're corrupt, so we must limit your right to organize and speak out."

Now, Bush and Kerry are suing those groups who are doing exactly that...organizing and criticizing them.

But you see, Kerry is not the President, and Bush is.

Can't escape the fact that the Bush campaign is suing those who are organizing and criticizing them.

If that isn't an attack of the First Amendment, I don't know what is.

[MikefromOhio]

Again, if he is soo bad, vote for your boy Kerry.....

[WOSG]

I oppose the Bush proposal, but I also oppose the intelletual dishonesty of opponents that dispute the terms/definitions, then calls Bush a 'liar' over that.
This is rather pathetic bit of debating dishonesty.

What Bush proposes is *not* the same open-ended all-illegal amnesty that the Democrats support. He supports a program of temporary workers that could expand the labor pool, and may lead to conversion of current illegal workers into legal temporary workers.
The proposal has holes and problems, but it is fair to say it is NOT amnesty.

On this one, Bush is the lesser of two evils. It should ALSO be noted btw, that of course the immigration caucus (Tancredo et al) are ALL Republicans. Helping the Democrats win this election is a great way to see the problem get worse.

We should support Bush but hold his feet to the fire on this issue and NOT support his proposal. The way to win this one is to fight it in the Congress.

[Guillermo]

"My boy Kerry?" You are hysterical. Kerry is worse than Bush, like I've always said.

But to you "Bush is God" people, any criticism should cease immediately, and any criticism means the Leftists have suddenly become "our boys."

Dissent within ones own party is a GOOD thing. Groupthink is a BAD thing.

You lemmings would gladly take it up the rear if the offender had an "(R)" following his name.

[mhking]

I disagree with Bush on this issue, but I'm not about to vote for Kerry (or for that matter, waste my vote by voting Constitution or Libertarian either).

There is time and room to change the stance of the Party from within on this note.

[mhking]

Oh, and you mean to tell me that because he disagrees with you on any one issue he's automatically a liberal?

I'd strongly suggest you check your definitions.

[gitmo]

The big issue and the primary focus in this election is the War on Terror and how best to advance a military strategy for winning it. Other issues are important, but this is the #1 issue. Period!

The concern is that someday we will have a commission similar to the 9/11 Commission, investigating how the US allowed a massive terrorist attack to occur, one that was perpetrated by aliens who waltzed across either our Mexican or our Canadian border. How did the US ignore the hundreds and thousand of people streaming into our country without being scrutinized? How did the US allow horrendous weapons to be hauled into the country to be used against US citizens? Why did the nation ignore the many warnings that came from citizens and foreigners alike?

The Republican Party won't survive that commission. The Republicans were obviously not complicite in 9/11, but they are turning a blind eye to this tragedy in making.