Compromise Ping!
In my line of work, 'compromise' is a very bad word.
Posted on 04/03/2006 7:36:42 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
Has Arlen checked into what Scottish law has to say about this?
...then they'll get royally screwed in November, and they know it. They're dealing from a position of weakness. If only our side would recognize that and act accordingly.
The House bill,which most voting for it knew very well would never become law, is "good" only with regard to the Senate amnesty bill.
There are not 100 congressmen who would vote for what needs to be done.
Neither do most people on our side, including Tancredo. This column of his is quite eye-opening on that. The "felon" provision was a poison pill that was supported by most Democrat Representatives.
"If the other side is about to pass a horrible bill...
...then they'll get royally screwed in November, and they know it."
I wish that was true, but I don't think it is. Assume a RINO Congressman votes for amnesty. What are the voter's choices? A RINO or a Dem who also wants amnesty. Plus, the immigration issue will be a moot point after an amnesty bill- the 12 million illegals will suddenly be legal guest workers. Illegal immigration won't be a very big issue for a decade or so. I probably won't vote at all if an amnesty bill passes.
NEWSFLASH TO ALL:
Five years is a REDUCTION of the current TEN YEARS REQUIRED RIGHT NOW for an illegal in this country to apply for a hardship stay. Five years is even less than the six years that was previously required in the 1990's!
I think the REAL polling says very bad news for the senators.
The real translation is SENATORS ARE TRYING TO SAVE AMNESTY PROGRAM!
And where are the provisions in any of these bills to discontinue entitlement and/or gov. assistance to the parasitic invaders?
And your reasoning is ...?
Dear GOP,
Whenever something leaks:
1. FIRST, you fix the leak.
2. NEXT, you clean up the mess.
3. THEN, you think about how you can prevent it from happening again.
Thanks.
The repubs handed that "felon" provision very poorly.
Well this gives me some hope. Some of those are good sense proposals. That coupled with border protection would make a good bill.
Excellent article!
Oh and on to something really important Florida won the National Champioship. Go SEC
ping
Yes, perhaps, except recent history over Dubai proves otherwise. You can scrap the idea they are afraid to oppose Bush. And, btw, I despise what they did over Dubai, but as an example it holds up very well against your theory.
If I want to wear rose colored glasses I take this story at face value.
At face value it indicates the amnesty boosters are having trouble getting enough Reps onboard for Specter/McCain/Kennedy's collaborative efforts that they are being forced to give somewhat on border security concerns/English mandated and so forth in the proposals to lure a few more votes their way. This could mean calls to them are working, as well the "500,000" march hurt their cause.
Cynically, I fall in line with what another suggested. It's similiar to what they did with ANWR. The House played the bad guy while the Senate pretended it had enough votes for passage. IMO, it was an orchetrated stunt.
Until shown otherwise, IMO, the House directly at risk in district elections went hardline knowing the Senate would never fall in line. The Senate takes the opposite approach and appears completely irresponsible. In the end they 'concede' a few points in the Senate, and the House "claims" victory because without their hardline approach nothing would have been done. The Senate claims victory because they got their precious blessing on illegals.
Or so, imo, is their plan if they can fool enough people.
In the end amnesty happens. The only question is how much pro-border enforcement proponents get out of this scheme. I'm not hopeful.
Thank God someone is thinking. I been screaming that the votes to "deport them all" were not there. What will be interesting to see is what the Dems do. I am talking about individual dems. Besides a few they have been silent it seems. A few might break and endorse a good bill so it doesnt hurt them come election time. That would negate the hard core conservatives that are yelling no compromise. Of course I expect that the Dem leadership would be infuriated but I don't think they can hold a party line vote on this if a decent proposal comes down that has security and a reasonable guest worker program.
GOP Senators Seek Immigration Compromise ... followed by minority status.
In my line of work, 'compromise' is a very bad word.
Great if one happens to be a d@mn yankee. "Send them to Texas". How about we have YOU deal with them? You organize your local LEO round them up, pay for the bus, and deport them. Texas will never bear the brunt of Yankee ignorance. Since y'all know how to do everything so well, YOU pay for it. Or p*ss off, and build your own wall. Start with New Jersey. And have a nice day.
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.