Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Privately, Bush Says He Favors Citizenship (for Illegals)
AP ^ | April 26, 2006 | DAVID ESPO

Posted on 04/26/2006 5:20:12 PM PDT by West Coast Conservative

President Bush generally favors plans to give millions of illegal immigrants a chance at U.S. citizenship without leaving the country, but does not want to be more publicly supportive because of opposition among conservative House Republicans, according to senators who attended a recent White House meeting.

Several officials familiar with the meeting also said Democrats protested radio commercials that blamed them for Republican-written legislation that passed the House and would make illegal immigrants vulnerable to felony charges.

Bush said he was unfamiliar with the ads, which were financed by the Republican National Committee, according to officials familiar with the discussions.

At another point, Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada and other members of his party pressed the president about their concern that any Senate-passed bill would be made unpalatable in final talks with the House.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking Democrat, said the lawmaker who would lead House negotiators, House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, had been "intractable" in negotiations on other high-profile bills in the past. Bush did not directly respond to the remark, officials said.

The Republican and Democratic officials who described the conversation did so Wednesday on condition of anonymity, saying they had not been authorized to disclose details.

Bush convened the session to give momentum to the drive for election-year immigration legislation, a contentious issue that has triggered large street demonstrations and produced divisions in both political parties. Senators of both parties emerged from the session praising the president's involvement and said the timetable was achievable.

"Yes, he thinks people should be given a path to citizenship," said Sen. Mel Martinez., R-Fla., a leading supporter of immigration legislation in the Senate.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; Mexico; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aliens; bordersecurity; bush; bushamnesty; bushhaters; citzenship; illegalaliens; illegals; immigrantlist; immigration; invasionusa; openborders; sellout
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 761-780781-800801-820 ... 921-931 next last
To: narby
Further complicating the issue is that while these folks are "illegal", then they will stay mexican. The first step to assimilation, where they lose their mexican culture of no-education, no-ambition, and third world mentality is to make them legal (while, of course, closing the border as tight as practical).

It's a bit of social jujitsu. Where we direct their desire to be in america into a motivation for them to become "American". As long as the status quo is maintained, that won't happen. And because of political realities, sticking with the "no amnesty" position means the status quo will not change, and I think that's the worst option of all.

Those coming here illegally are not coming to be Americans. They, even when granted citizenship, will retain their Mexican citizenship. They are coming here,as they have said, "to take back what was stolen from them." We should believe people when they tell us what their intentions are.

781 posted on 04/28/2006 12:07:28 PM PDT by Razz Barry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 779 | View Replies]

To: Razz Barry; narby
You posted: "We should believe people when they tell us what their intentions are."

AGREED!! I think Bush proves that point for us.

:)Easy Does It:)

782 posted on 04/28/2006 12:16:06 PM PDT by eazdzit (Vote AGAINST All CFR, NWO PuboCrats !! CROSS OVER IN THE PRIMARIES!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 781 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
Briefing En Route to Mexico

Secretary Condoleezza Rice
Mexico City, Mexico
March 10, 2005

QUESTION: The recent violence along the border where two Americans were killed prompted the U.S. to send out a Travel Advisory and the Mexicans were very upset about that and the accompanying letter by the ambassador.....

SECRETARY RICE: Well, we're going to continue to work with Mexico on issues of border security and I, frankly, think we've made progress...

When we have concerns, as we did that provoked the Travel Advisory, we have an obligation to make them known to American citizens and we will have to continue to do that...This is not a matter of pointing fingers. This is a matter of really trying to get the best possible coordination and work that we can so that there is safety for citizens of both countries on both sides of the border.

QUESTION: A bit of a follow-up on that, and we've had -- you've mentioned successes in border security and apprehending those trying to cross illegally. Recently there was an article talking about ranchers and people along the New Mexico-Mexico border that basically are trying to form their own efforts to stop illegal cross-border movement. How does that complicate things for border security people and so forth? How do you react to that?

SECRETARY RICE: Well, obviously, from our point of view, the U.S. Government is not supporting these activities and it is obviously best if these matters are left to officials. The United States can't intervene in activities of its citizens in all cases, but you can be certain that if there are any laws broken that people are going to be held accountable for any breakings of laws. But these people are not being supported by the United States Government.

Who are "these people" who are not supported by the U.S. Government, and who are referred to as the "ranchers and people along the New Mexico-Mexico border that are trying to form [i.e., organize] their own efforts to stop illegal cross-border movement"? Who was "these people" that had receiving such publicity? I proffer it be The Minutemen. It was they who were at the early stages of organizing and announced plans of their intent to begin patrolling the border on April 1, 2005, and within a matter of weeks as of the date of this press briefing.
783 posted on 04/28/2006 2:06:42 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 780 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
Funny how everyone in the world (from Fox news to the BBC, to the vast majority of Freepers, to everyone else) took his comment as directed at the Minutemen.

Propaganda isn't funny. BTW, most the people haven't seen the direct transcript.

He's had ample time to clarify his remarks as not having been directed at the Minutemen, but he's never once even begun to do so. The silence is deafening.

He's never clarified his remarks? The silence is deafening?

Once again, you're wrong.

I've got bookmarks to three Scott McClellan briefings plus this direct Bush statement that says you're wrong;

Link

784 posted on 04/28/2006 2:33:37 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 777 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
Wrong. Congress had a budget for adding 10,000 border patrol agents over 5 years. He reduced it to only add only 210, which keeps the numbers about status quo. There is attrition with Border Patrol agents, through retirement and seeking other employment. Now, would you mind finally posting a link to corroborate your claim that employer fines/arrests have decreased BECAUSE funding for Border Enforcement has increased? Thanks.

Link
785 posted on 04/28/2006 2:42:10 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 563 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
"but you can be certain that if there are any laws broken that people are going to be held accountable for any breakings of laws"

LOL, it is offical only tax paying Americans are expected to obey the law. Do not vote for anyone currently holding office, throw all of them out on their butts, from local school boards all the way to DC. A complete house cleaning.

786 posted on 04/28/2006 2:43:23 PM PDT by jpsb ("")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 783 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
the Minutemen weren't even on the border at the time. Most likely, the President not knowing who the reporter was talking about, gave his general philosophy of what he did not want to see at the border

It was common knowledge and conventional wisdom, as of March 23, 2005, that the President knew about the formation of Minutemen, their plan to launch operations on April 1, 2005, that Fox's government, as stated on March 1, 2005, was poised to take legal action against the Minutemen, and that after her March 10, 2005 visit to Mexico, Secretary of State Condi Rice would have reported back to President Bush the Mexican Government's legal position and anger regarding the Minutemen, who were also referred to by other names, such as anti-migrant patrols.

I didn't say the president didn't know of the Minutemen. I did say that the reporter asked the president about people who were currently on the border.

Again looking at the transcript his most likely intent was to give his general philosophy of what he did not want to see at the border.

He later confirmed that was his intent.

787 posted on 04/28/2006 2:50:00 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 780 | View Replies]

To: West Coast Conservative; All
The Bushbots have mounted a Primary assault on Tom Tancredo !

Support Tom;

keep out the Illegal Aliens ! at TANCREDO FOR CONGRESS

His opponent is Juan Botero: Dual citizen American and Columbian.

He is from Columbia : hum! I wonder where the money is coming from ?


788 posted on 04/28/2006 2:52:17 PM PDT by Uri’el-2012 (Hosea 6:6 For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Razz Barry
Those coming here illegally are not coming to be Americans.

Blanket statements are almost never true. That's like saying every Republican is rich. Maybe many are. But certianly not all, and probably not even most.

They, even when granted citizenship, will retain their Mexican citizenship.

We should not allow dual citizenship. I'm not certian that we do, and if so, the law should be changed.

They are coming here,as they have said, "to take back what was stolen from them."

The mouthy one's who get in front of cameras say that. Most just want a nice place to live and a job.

We should believe people when they tell us what their intentions are.

If we allow them to be here legally, require them to learn english as a prerequiste to citizenship and voting, and disallow dual citizenship and mailing money to another country, then if their goal is "taking back what was stolen" it will have failed. This is the United States of America. We should welcome all good people here from all over the world, as long as they are willing to become Americans in language and culture. All others need not apply.

789 posted on 04/28/2006 2:57:35 PM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 781 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
You did indicate that the president was NOT referring to the Minutemen when he referred to vigilantes. You specifically said, with reference to the reporter's question:

Most likely, the President not knowing who the reporter was talking about, gave his general philosophy of what he did not want to see at the border.

He knew EXACTLY who the reporter was talking about: The Minutemen.

790 posted on 04/28/2006 3:55:54 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 787 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
You said: employer fines/arrests have decreased BECAUSE funding for Border Enforcement has increased

That comment was in response to this:

Employer Investigations Conducted by
U.S. Immigration Authorities, 1997-2003


Year
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003

Arrests
17,554
13,914
2,849
953
735
485
445
Investigations
Completed

7,537
7,788
3,898
1,966
1,595
2,061
2,194
Number of
Fines Levied

778
535
297
180
78
13
124
Source: Dept. of Homeland Security, 2003 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics,
September 2004. Table 39.(1997-2003)

Now you quote a 2006 article:

Wash. Times | March 26 2006 | Excerpt:

"Comprehensive immigration reform begins with securing our borders," Mr. Bush said. The president cited a 66 percent increase in border-security funding since he took office, along with a 42 percent increase in interior-enforcement spending and a total of 6 million illegal aliens caught and returned home. Comprehensive immigration reform begins with securing our borders," Mr. Bush said.

Where does this article explain why there has been a reduction in employer arrests/fines since he took office, as shown in the above chart, especially since he claims to have a "42 percent increase in interior-enforcement spending" which CONTRADICTS your claim as to why there have been reductions in fines and investigations?
791 posted on 04/28/2006 4:06:33 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 785 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
it is official only tax paying Americans are expected to obey the law.

throw all of them out on their butts, from local school boards all the way to DC. A complete house cleaning.

BUMP!!

792 posted on 04/28/2006 4:08:02 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 786 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
"The following question and answer took place in March of 2005. The Minutemen were not on the border in March, they went down to the border in April of 2005. The reporter asked President Bush his opinion of people on the border at that time. Being that the Minutemen weren't on the border at the time and possibly not knowing if anybody else was on the border at that time, the president gave his general philosophy of what he wanted to see at the border." -- From your last comment

" WP | Transcript | August 2, 2005 | President Bush | Excerpt: THE PRESIDENT: Well, this was -- I was in Waco when I decried potential vigilantism. I want to make it clear that this is before they even showed up, as I recall, and I wanted to make it clear that it was intolerable for people to take the law in their own hands, because we didn't want people showing up with guns." [Emphasis mine] -- From this past comment

Ok, so let's see, the President says he was talking about "they" before "they" showed up, and by your own admission, the Minutemen were not yet on the border when the remarks were made. Ergo, the President was not talking about people already on the border who were attacking illegals, but rather an unnamed "they" who were going to be coming to the border, possibly armed. Hmm, I wonder who "they" might be.

Any ideas?

(Keep in mind that the gun-grabber loving MSM had been 'reporting' all along that the Minutemen were a group of people on their way to the border carrying guns)

The President called the Minutemen vigilantes before he even had a clue who they were. Worse than misunderstanding them, the President pre-judged a group of patriotic Americans as gun-toting nutjobs while pushing an amnesty program for millions of law-breaking illegal aliens.

Frankly, I find it disgusting that the President of the United States cares more for foreign invaders than he does for patriotic Americans.
793 posted on 04/28/2006 6:41:54 PM PDT by NJ_gent (Modernman should not have been banned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 784 | View Replies]

To: NJ_gent
Sequence of Events;

Ok, so let's see, the President says he was talking about "they" before "they" showed up, and by your own admission, the Minutemen were not yet on the border when the remarks were made. Ergo, the President was not talking about people already on the border who were attacking illegals, but rather an unnamed "they" who were going to be coming to the border, possibly armed. Hmm, I wonder who "they" might be.

The president was clearly addressing all people and all groups who were on the border and all people and all groups(including the Minutemen) who were soon to be on the border when he made the statement.

The statement was a clear-as-day warning about what he didn't want to see on the border. It wasn't an identification of what was on the border nor was it a prediction of what he thought would be on the border.

In short, he didn't call anybody a vigilante nor did he call any group(including the Minutemen) vigilantes. Instead he said people and groups(including the Minutemen) shouldn't act like a vigilantes.

794 posted on 04/28/2006 7:25:49 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 793 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
You did indicate that the president was NOT referring to the Minutemen when he referred to vigilantes. You specifically said, with reference to the reporter's question: Most likely, the President not knowing who the reporter was talking about, gave his general philosophy of what he did not want to see at the border. He knew EXACTLY who the reporter was talking about: The Minutemen.

See post #794.

795 posted on 04/28/2006 7:27:05 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 790 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
Where does this article explain why there has been a reduction in employer arrests/fines since he took office, as shown in the above chart, especially since he claims to have a "42 percent increase in interior-enforcement spending" which CONTRADICTS your claim as to why there have been reductions in fines and investigations?

Okay so there's been an increase in both ICE and CBP spending. Isn't that a good thing.

BTW, check the "2004 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics".

Formal deportations are at an all time high.

1991 33,189
1992 43,671
1993 42,542
1994 45,674
1995 50,924
1996 69,680
1997 114,432
1998 173,146
1999 181,072
2000 186,222
2001 178,026
2002 150,542
2003 189,368
2004 202,842

I haven't seen these statistics posted once. Yet that little chart you posted keeps showing up.

When objectively trying to show what-in-the-world is going on with illegal immigration it's best to show a complete picture.

796 posted on 04/28/2006 7:40:51 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 791 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
August 2, 2005 | Reporter: We've got these groups on the border called the Minutemen. They think you've called them vigilantes. Do you think they are vigilantes?

August 2, 2005 | President Bush: Well, this was -- I was in Waco when I decried potential vigilantism. I want to make it clear that this is before they even showed up, as I recall, and I wanted to make it clear that it was intolerable for people to take the law in their own hands, because we didn't want people showing up [THIS WOULD MEAN THE PEOPLE HE WAS REFERRING TO WEREN'T THERE YET] with guns.

Where is the word NO to the direct question, "Do you think they are vigilantes?" It's absent. Nice try, but you can keep your head in the sand.

797 posted on 04/28/2006 7:41:17 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 794 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
Where is the word NO to the direct question, "Do you think they are vigilantes?" It's absent. Nice try, but you can keep your head in the sand.

The report ask the president if he did "A". The president responded by saying he did "B".

GMAB!

Keep your head, up yours!

798 posted on 04/28/2006 7:52:45 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 797 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign

Is the truth getting you frazzled?


799 posted on 04/28/2006 7:54:06 PM PDT by nicmarlo (Bush is the Best President Ever. Rah. Rah.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 798 | View Replies]

To: FreeReign
Correction:The reporter asked the president if he did "A". The president responded by saying he did "B".
800 posted on 04/28/2006 7:55:04 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 798 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 761-780781-800801-820 ... 921-931 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson