Bush Outlines Border Security Plan

FOX News ^ | 11/28/2005 | Wendell Goler, James Rosen

[Brian_Baldwin]

Bush Outlines Border Security Plan
Monday, November 28, 2005

CRAWFORD, Texas — Trying to unify a fractious Republican Party headed to midterm elections with wide differences over how to best deal with illegal immigration, President Bush was in Tucson, Ariz., on Monday to say America shouldn't have to choose between a welcoming society and a lawful one.

"Securing our border is essential to securing our homeland. And I want to thank all of those who are working around the clock to defend our border, to enforce our laws and to uphold the values of the United States of America. America is grateful to those on the front lines enforcing the border," Bush said at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in the first of two speeches on border control.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,176879,00.html

[mthom]

That would be the result if all the "guest workers" could become citizens after three years. You must be naturalized or are close to someone who is if you want it to be so easy to do.

[tarator]

I agree that coming legally and staying legally is not the same thing - all but 1 of the 9/11 terrorists came across LEGALLY - shouldn't that be our priority?

I am not sure I understand your question. Shouldn't what be our priority? Restricting legal immigration?

Our priority should be removing all incentives to come here illegally and strictly enforcing our immigration laws, including forcing rogue cities like Los Angeles to cooperate with ICE and the Border Patrol.

[Condor51]

***Well, I am a DEFENSE lawyers, so . . .***

Then you can afford the fictitious $6.00/head of lettuce -

And Soooooooo.....
STFU you criminal enabling a$$wipe pinhead.

And go back to I'm A Bottom Feeding, Scum Sucking, DIRT BAG, Lawyer where you belong. Americans are trying to discuss something important here.

ps: Your spelling stinks too.

[NJ_gent]

"I think US citizenship should be granted quicker and more cheaply to those seeking it legally"

That I agree with wholeheartedly.

"does that answer all your questions now?"

It doesn't really address them, as we're talking about illegal aliens using anchor babies to keep law enforcement from enforcing the law. I want the law enforced, all illegals deported, and the border secured. It's pretty clear and easy, and I also think it's sound national security policy to secure our perimeter in time of war.

[NJ_gent]

"(unless it's Jeb ; )"

Jeb Bush wanted to give drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants while their immigration status is still illegal. Do you also support giving drivers' licenses to illegal immigrants who remain here illegally?

[NJ_gent]

"I am not sure I understand your question. Shouldn't what be our priority? Restricting legal immigration?"

It must be absolutely infuriating for you, someone who's gone through the process of coming here legally, to have someone else say it should be harder for people like you and easier for those who just jumped across the border and ran from police.

[Jorge]

...oh and good luck getting any loans after Manuel steals your ID, gets a bunch of on-line loans and credit cards in your name, runs up the bills and leaves you holding the bag!

...oh, we've got plenty of home grown Americans doing this already.

[NJ_gent]

"...oh, we've got plenty of home grown Americans doing this already."

Are you saying that criminals should not be dealt with in such a way that their ability to repeat their crimes is minimized within reason? In the case of non-citizens, that means deporting them to their country of origin and ensuring their inability to return. In the case of citizens, that means jailing them. In the case of sex offenders, we go even further in making their presence known to all once their prison time has been served.

[Itzlzha]

but FYI we are discussing CHANGING the law, not breaking it - get a clue.

Hmm...

Is illegally entering the United States against the law? Choose one...(Y/N)

Is obtaining fraudulent documents Illegal? Choose one...(Y/N)

Is illegally obtaining employment with fraudulent documents illegal? Choose one...(Y/N)

Is obtaining work illegally without proper Social Security /Green Card ID illegal? Choose one...(Y/N)

Is knowingly hiring an illegal without proper papers/Green Card illegal? Choose one...(Y/N)

Is avoiding income taxes by working "under the table" illegal? Choose one...(Y/N)

Is obtaining Gub'Mint services illegally by presenting fraudulent documentation/ID illegal? Choose one...(Y/N)

I can continue, but those are what ILLEGALS do just to come here and "work" ILLEGALLY for that cheap lettuce. See, it's that little word "Illegal"! You seem to miss that word EVERY time! How can a "Defense Lawyer" not understand the illegalities...oh, wait...nevermind. That one's obvious!

[gitmogrunt]

Action Alert We Need Your Help Now!!

Oppose the "One Face at the Border" initiative Email your Members of Congress asking them to oppose the "One Face at the Border" initiative. Both Party's have failed the American people on Border Security.

In 2003, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced the creation of a new Customs and Border Protection Officer (CBPO) position and the “One Face at the Border” initiative. Under this plan, a new position, the CBPO, would combine the duties of legacy inspectors from Customs, the Immigration and Nationalization Service (INS) and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) into a single front-line border security position. With 41,000 employees, CBP is in control of 317 official ports-of-entry for travelers and cargo.

Essentially, the “One Face at the Border” initiative was aimed at unifying the inspection process that travelers entering the United States have to go through. Instead of making three stops – an Immigration Inspector, a Customs Inspector and an Agriculture Inspector – travelers would meet with a single primary inspections officer who was specially trained to do the job of all three.

Consolidating these three organizations has caused logistical and institutional chaos and has taken attention away from critical homeland security priorities. It is true that all three of these organizations deal with front line border and port security, but they do so in very different capacities.

Please copy and paste this and email your Members of Congress asking them to oppose the "One Face at the Border" initiative and support a detailed, independent review of the proposal.

[tarator]

It must be absolutely infuriating for you, someone who's gone through the process of coming here legally, to have someone else say it should be harder for people like you and easier for those who just jumped across the border and ran from police.

I am not complaining. America has been good to me and my family. Some tightening of the legal immigration process was in fact necessary and did actually occur after 9/11. Before that, it was extremely easy for citizens of some Muslim countries to obtain US student and visitor's visas. That has changed as far as I know. I fully support that.

I am not advocating an easy or fast legal immigration process. No country should allow in more people than it could absorb. I am advocating a fair process, with the same rules and laws applying to all immigrants.

[Stellar Dendrite]

how can the republicans go after clinton for lying under oath while holding the door open for illegal aliens?

both broke the law and deserve to be prosecuted.


whoops, hispandering.

[Jorge]

Are you saying that criminals should not be dealt with in such a way that their ability to repeat their crimes is minimized within reason?

Uh, no.
Where did you get this idea?
My post was ONE SENTENCE.

[Gritty]

Better $6 lettuce than one more American killed/maimed/robbed for "cheap lettuce"!

Maybe we need a new slogan here...

NO BLOOD FOR LETTUCE!!

[mthom]

Why do you think that the "guest workers" should be given the option of citizenship after 3 years?

[teawithmisswilliams]

Our priority should be removing all incentives to come here illegally and strictly enforcing our immigration laws, including forcing rogue cities like Los Angeles to cooperate with ICE and the Border Patrol.

Yes. I would make one addition: completely prohibit any muslim immigration until islam reforms itself into something compatible with Western civilization.

[ndt]

"Your argument isn't well-founded. Jurisdiction doesn't apply to ambassador's children, even if they go to an American hospital off the embassy for the birth."

Ambassadors are specifically exempted from jurisdiction. So this in no way affects the argument one way or another.

U.S. v. Benner (excerpt) "The general law of all nations, as well as the municipal laws of each, exempt ministers from all jurisdiction or control over their persons, so long as their representative character is recognized by the government which sends or receives them"

"Read the writing of the time..."

I have read it and I agree, that Senator Howard did not intend citizenship to extend to the children born in the U.S. to foreign parents. However, that is exactly what the accepted wording does allow. It is a case of do what I meant, not what I said. I'm afraid that you will have to change the amendment if that is what you want, because the current wording is IMO being correctly applied.

[NJ_gent]

Alright, so then you support the deportation of all non-citizens found to have commited criminal acts?

[Pelham]

There you go, using logic on a Quisling dupe. Don't you know that's cheating?

[Mr. Mojo]

"Securing our border is essential to securing our homeland." - GWB

Correct. Interesting that it took him more than four years after 9/11 to point this out. Alas, pointing is all he'll be doing.