Posted on 10/05/2004 5:15:05 PM PDT by 4.1O dana super trac pak
Fine. But wouldn't you agree the timing is wrong?
Considering the fact that a large majority of the illegal aliens who attempt to cross our southern border are successful, it makes me wonder how many illegal aliens with terrorist ties weren't caught while making the crossing and are now residing somewhere in the United States.
I wish it didn't happen so close to the election, but its a bill Congress wants to pass before Nov, so it was bound to happen. I also wish Bush would be willing to compromise just a little with his own base on this issue.
I doubt it if Tancredo's comments will hurt Bush in the slightest, especially considering how Tancredo usually prefaces any criticism of Bush on immigration with praise for him on other issues that people care more about -- like the war on terrorism and his handling of tax cuts.
If anyone's loose lips are going to hurt Bush this week then it will be those of Paul Bremmer who has given ammunition to Kerry for attacks on Bush's handling of Iraq.
Keep your head buried in the sand. Appears your taking the Bush approach to our open borders and nation security. Time will tell and it ain't going to be pretty. Until you've lived on the border speak softly of what you know nothing about.
Just to list a few:
1. President Bush is playing politics with national security.
2. President Bush is proposing amnesty.
3. President Bush has adopted an "open border" policy
4.President Bush has done nothing to secure our borders.
As for your assumption that the majority of people agree with Tancredo, you are wrong. Most conservatives and Republicans agree with President Bush, not Tancredo. Buchanan/Tancredo and other anti-Mexican groups made the Kolbe primary a referendum on the anti-Mexican agenda. Tabcredo's Team America organization (chaired by Babe Buchanan) put it's entire weight behind Kolbe's opponent and lost 2 to 1.
Buchanan's swarms knew in their hearts that he would be elected president in 2000 because they thought his overtly racist message would strike a chord in the majority of voters who were afraid to tell pollsters their real intentions. He got less than 1/4th of 1%. Today those same people believe that the vast majority of Americans are secretly prejudiced against Mexicans. They are wrong.
Intelligent Americans understand the need for increasing labor in an expanding economy. Intelligent Americans understand that if American companies can't find employees in the U.S. that they will have no choice but to move or outsource overseas. If a company closes, outsources or moves overseas all of it's employees suffer, not just the 10% who may be out of status. You would probably think twice if your job was in jeopardy.
How anyone can defend Bush on this and continue yammering about how Tancredo is a hothead, I don't understand.
This alone should be reason enough for "conservatives" to tell Bush to go pound sand.
Ping.
And La Raza/MEChA devotees like you show up on threads like this and wave your Race Card in the face of anybody who dares to speak out against illegal immigration.
This is not Tancredo's bill. The language in it came straight from the bipartisan 9/11 Commission.
Let me leave you with a number: 235,379.
That is the official figure, released today by the Border Patrol, of the number of illegal aliens arrested in little old Cochise County where I live during Fiscal Year 2004. That number is a little more than twice the number of legal citizens here.
The local Border Patrol agents insist they are lucky to catch maybe one in five, so that means about 950,000 breezed right past them. Maybe I should post Minnesota tourist info out on the illegal alien trails.
We don't have an "open border" and people illegally crossing are not a national security problem.
Treasonous?
What is treasonous? Pointing out that what the President is doing is STUPID?
Excuse me, but Tancredo doesn't work for the President.
He works for the people of his district.
And Tancredo didn't swear to uphold loyalty to Bush and to the RNC-Karl Rove agenda.
He swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States.
You ought to get it into your head that Bush is not a deity and no person in this country is obligated to treat him as such. This "Bush can do no wrong" bullshit is getting way out of hand.
You mean people like me? Devotees? Dude, I can't stand Buchanan. I happen to be of Latino ancestry. And I can't stand all the damn ILLEGAL (you left that word out) ALIENS pouring into L.A. and making my home the waiting room for hell.
If a company closes, outsources or moves overseas all of it's employees suffer, not just the 10% who may be out of status illegal alien lawbreakers.
No, when the White House attempts to strip language out of a bill that might give some respite to Americans living on the border -- that stinks. In fact, it is downright sKerry.
Those of us who live here are sick and tired of being sold out by damn near every pissant political parasite who manages to kiss enough fanny to earn a DC address.
I don't have any disagreement with people who speak out agasinst illegal immiugration. My problem is with people who are using the immigrastion issue to try to undermine the reelection efforts of President Bush. The 1/4th of one percenters.
"We don't have an "open border" and people illegally crossing are not a national security problem."
What world do you live in? It's time you removed your rose-colored glasses and viewed the REAL world.
Then why don't you make those arguments? Why don't you tell us what the economic impact would be on our economy if 10 million employees were suddenly eliminated. Why don't you explain the history of immigration in America? Why don't you examine the political influence of labor unions in opposing immigrant laborers?
Remember the Buchanan ads four years ago about the man choking to death on a meatball because the 911 operator was bilingual? What did a man choking have to do with history or economics or politics?
Do you know what an open border is?
Bush is playing politics. His rejection of meausre popular with most people is a futile attempt to win the Hispanic vote.
Bush is proposing amnesty. If an illegal alien is granted legal status with the possibility of eventually gaining permanent residency, then its amnesty.
Your Kolbe example would be a good one if immigration were the only issue, and if there were no such thing as the power of incumbency. But just wait; there is an initiative on the ballot this Nov in Arizona that will take a stand against illegal immigration. Last I heard it was polling at well over 60%. Now clearly, many of the same people who support this measure will turn around and vote for people like Kolbe who oppose them on the specifics of this issue. That happens all the time. The people of liberal California have, in the last ten years, voted to bar public services for illegal aliens, ban racial preferences, ban gay marriage, and ban bilingual education -- yet the same majorities turn around and vote for the likes of Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein who oppose them on pretty much every one of those issues.
Unfortunately we can't have a national referendum on immigration policy. But do you really think that most conservatives agree with Bush on immigration? Polls consistently show a majority or plurality of Americans want legal immigration to be reduced. Bush wants to increase legal immigration. Polls show Americans opposed to things like amnesty, acceptance of the Matricula Counselor Card, drivers licenses for illegals.
You seem to be making the argument that Buchanan's failure means his views on immigration were unpopular. That's simplistic and wrong. I've already cited the referendum examples, and another flaw is that immigration simply isn't the most important issue. For most voters it is not a top-tier, vote-deciding issue.
Your statements about Buchanan's 'racist message' and of your claim that others feel most Americans to be secretly prejudiced against Mexicans are absurd, and again, sound like something a leftwinger would say. You seem to be expressing the idea that to stray from the PC, pro-mass immigration line is to be guilty of harboring racist or xenophobic feelins. Try and understand this really simple message: Wanting less immigration overall, and wanting strict laws against illegal immigration, and wanting aggressive assimilation policies does not make one guilty of racism or of being prejudiced against Mexicans. Understand? If so, then most Americans are guilty, but of course that premise is ludicrous, as well as being poison to the idea of open and rational debate.
Your statements about labor is only speaking to one side of the issue. It is also true that if you have an unending supply of cheap labor then it will drive down wages, thus making such work unattractive to natives. You want a system whereby we make certain work unappealing by having such a large labor supply, then complain about natives not wanting to do the jobs that immigration policy has helped to make unattractive. You offer as a cure one of the causes.
And lets be clear about one thing -- neither Tancredo or Buchanan is calling for an end to immigration. If you bothered to see what they really believe, you'd see that they support moderate levels of legal immigration. Both support annual legal levels of about 300,000 per year. That's three hundred thousand per year. That we are at a point when one is called 'anti-immigration' for wanting to let 300,000 people immigrate here each year is a shame.
I certainly know what an open border is. An open border is one where the Border Patrol apprehends hundreds every night, then "voluntarily" deports them without penalty so they can cross safely the next night.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.