You are so right. This issue will cost the republicans.
Ping.
This is the one issue that if properly exploited by Democrats could get them the White House back.
======
Yes. If the leftist Dems think for one minute that NET VOTES CAN BE GAINED by backstabbing their Hispanic vote, THEY WILL DO IT. They will stand for closing the borders, rounding up illegals and sending them back, etc, etc, etc. Big and loud. Mark this ole guy's words -- these communists are so POWER HUNGRY that they WILL DO ANYTHING to get back in the White House.
MONEY QUOTE: "rank-and-file Republican voters take a more sensible position. They believe that immigration should be legal and controlled, occurring at a manageable level accompanied by assimilation. They are receptive to immigrants who actually intend to give their allegiance to America, but don’t see any need to import poverty, cultural balkanization and sociopolitical fragmentation."
I have a sneaking feeling that open-border, pro-choice McCain will be the GOP nominee in 2008. And it will be a disaster.
sure, the Democratics have no solution to this problem - hell, they don't even see it as a problem, but if future elections are as close as the ones we've recently survived, then the GOP cannot afford to IGNORE this issue.
on a side note: the new FREEPER poll regarding illegal immigration shows that over 3,500 registered FReepers have voted. This shows how popular the FR website is. Could it be that there are some 5000 active FReepers regularly checking in? You bet!
The DUmmbasses are having their pathetic fundraising effort now - and I cannot help but think that they have somewhere between 500 and 1000 active DUmbasses
the last FR fundraising quarter showed 2172 donations (including monthlies).
as of last quarter FR had 22,734 registerd members - but I am sure that many are no longer active FReepers.
That is the truth! I just don't understand the unwillingness of the Party Leaders to see controlled Immigration as a winning issue. IMO there are many on the Left who don't like the current situation any more than those of us do (At least Polls show opposition to Illegals crosses Party Affiliation)
"This will surely cost us votes"
No doubt it will, either from lack of enthusiasm in the base or the emergence of a Third arty candidate who siphons off Rep votes. Again, mystified why this is possible when the solution appears so self evident - Adopt a common sense, adherence to the EXISTING law approach to the problem. IMHO a no brainer.
One thing's certain: This issue, along with gun laws, and abortion, are the turning points for many people. They're all the most difficult issues discussed here on FR.
I think that there's far more risk for the GOP by taking the current line, which is essentially ignoring illegal immigration. That path may lead to lots of folks abandoning the party for some other party, or no party at all.
Oh the despair, we just won an election and we are falling apart? I think not. Sure we have issues we do not walk in lock step like Democrats. As issues boil to the surface they'll be addressed. The sky is not falling, I repeat the sky is not falling, well unless you're a Democrat.
Agreed, the powers that be need to stop the pandering that risks our national security and jeopardizes our sovereignty and start doing their jobs.
If they don't they will lose a significant amount of support.
"Yet most rank-and-file Republican voters take a more sensible position. They believe that immigration should be legal and controlled, occurring at a manageable level accompanied by assimilation. They are receptive to immigrants who actually intend to give their allegiance to America, but don’t see any need to import poverty, cultural balkanization and sociopolitical fragmentation."
Amen to that. That's how this VOTER sees it.
Most don't care.
If polled they will say they are against illegal immigration.
If polled they will say they are against illegal use of hands.
But the polls also consistently show that immigration ranks way down the list of issues that people care about.
When the issue does come up for debate in the next few years, and Bush rolls out his machine to pass his reforms the people will support him.
Meanwhile, the anti-immigrants are circling around in a little group of hysterical screaming whackos and think they are being heard by the real people outside their circle.
On this issue, more than any other, the Grand Old Party/Good Ole Boys are perpetuating the image of the GOP as a party of the rich and of big business. I suspect that the unfortunate truth in this case is that all of the above are true and Republican politicians are in a Catch-22: their base opposes "amnesty light", but if they oppose it, many of their biggest financial contributors will bail on them.
(I guess this thread will demonstrate to that moron that said that any post that was contrary to the GOP party line gets pulled is full of hot air. You out there, Mo?)
Actually I would prefer that this be a states right issue. States are the ones putting out the money for hospitals, school expenses, tax losses, etc.
www.dictionary.com defines society as:
A group of humans broadly distinguished from other groups by mutual interests, participation in characteristic relationships, shared institutions, and a common culture.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines society as:
A community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests
Finally, the Merriam-Webster Dictionary of Law defines society as:
an extended social group having a distinctive cultural and economic organization
I define a society as follows:
A group of people willing to submit to a set of rules in order to partake in the benefits produced by the group as a whole.
Given the above definitions, it would seem that those who want to be part of this society, should adhere to the cultural, economic, and social rules of this society. If you walked into Burger King passing out coupons to McDonald's and telling everyone who comes in that Micky D's was better, the manager would ask you to leave.
If you walked into Burger King and starting asking all the customers for money to buy a number one combo, the manager would ask you to leave.
If you walked into Burger King and started making a nuisance of your self, and you refused to settle down when asked, the manager would ask you to leave.
The point is, if you are not willing to live by the rules of the society, you cannot expect the society to welcome you with open arms.
The only difference between Burger King and our society is that the manager of Burger King, will actually ask you to leave, and call the cops to enforce his request if you don't.
And BTW, before there is any wringing of hand and gnashing of teeth, yes, I agree that some of the rules need to be changed from time to time. There just happen to be rules for doing that as well, and last time I checked, those rules did not include, intimidation, extortion, or explosives.
Best Regards
Sergio
"Fox looks to strengthen ties with Arab world."
"Four accords were being signed during his visit, Fox told Algerian government-controlled daily El Moudjahid, ranging from exchanges in education, art and culture to a decision to do away with visas in diplomatic and official passports."
The president has completely lost his mind.
http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=9397&tabla=miami http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1342584/posts
He's also pretty well defined the political landscape here on FR. Do we side with enforcing our laws & following our Constitution or do we side with the IRs [Immigration RINOs]?
How about neither? Most of us don't want another job displacing guest worker program period. I would hope our Reps follow us.