Posted on 05/13/2006 12:56:02 PM PDT by forty_years
President Bush plans to address the nation on Monday night at 8 PM to con the American public into buying into his ludicrous immigration policies. His approval ratings are at an all-time low, with only 31% of Americans approving of his job performance, while "68% believe the United States is worse off today than it was before Mr. Bush became president." Bush's immigration policies would open the floodgates to illegals, and Americans do not approve -- and it looks like the Senate agrees. Another poll shows support for the House's tough and very sensible immigration legislation, HR 4437:
...69 percent said it was a good or very good idea when told it tries to make illegals go home by fortifying the border, forcing employer verification, and encouraging greater cooperation with local law enforcement while not increasing legal immigration; 27 percent said it was a bad or very bad idea.
In an attempt to assuage American concerns about the unfettered illegal immigration tidal wave, Bush has proposed using the National Guard to patrol our borders:
President Bush, trying to build momentum for an overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, is considering plans to shore up the Mexican border with National Guard troops paid for by the federal government, according to senior administration officials.One defense official said military leaders believe the number of troops required could range from 3,500 to 10,000, depending on the final plan.
That's a great idea, except that Bush wants to provide amnesty to the millions of illegals already present in the U.S., and he wants to allow 400,000 "guest workers" to enter the U.S. every year. This is a recipe for disaster.
There are at least 12 million illegal immigrants in the U.S., and 10,000 pouring into our nation every day. One study predicts there will be 5 million more Latin American immigrants in the U.S. by 2015, while another prognosticates that illegals will push the American population to 1/2 billion people by 2050. Since the U.S. government is failing dismally at stemming this unfettered tidal wave, a group of concerned citizens, the Minuteman, has tried to prevent illegal immigration, but it appears that Bush has betrayed them.
And it looks like the Republican-controlled Senate is on the verge of betraying the American people by planning to push through legislation which will implement Bush's disastrous proposals. If the Republicans are looking to retain the Senate in the 2006 elections, they may just be shooting themselves in their collective feet.
The problem with Bush and many Republicans is that they are looking at immigration solely in 2 modalities: 1) trying to court the Latino vote, and 2) looking at immigration solely in near-term economic terms.
President Bush and Mexico's President Fox are colluding in an unholy alliance. Bush wants cheap Mexican labor -- forget the problems illegals pose to American society. Fox, an arrogant racist, wants to dump his economic problems on the U.S. instead of enacting much-needed reforms in his own corrupt society. It looks like Senate Republicans have joined the alliance.
It is time for the U.S. to criminalize illegal immigration as a felony offense. We need to build a wall along the Mexico border and provide enough personnel to patrol that border. We need to make it very painful for employers who hire illegals.
Are we to sit by idly while illegal immigrants openly march through our streets, trying to intimidate our policy makers, defame our flag, and rewrite our national anthem? Complacency will lead to the end of our prosperity and democracy.
Perhaps most importantly, it is time for the Third World to start dealing with its own problems (like corruption and overpopulation), and stop trying to dump those problems on the U.S.
Take action: Support LEGAL immigration.
http://netwmd.com/blog/2006/05/13/596
149 posted on 05/13/2006 6:49:46 PM PDT by Earthdweller (I can go to the ABC boards if I want to argue with Dems, third party trolls and other wacked folks.)
Doctor, heal thyself.
That very well may be, and if so, kudos to you.
However if what you say is true, I am surprised then by your comment that President Bush is no Texan.
What is there to heal?..I'm not on a Republican forum promoting anti-republican stances. Are you? Now that's insane.
"Well let me be clear I am not for a blank check. ..
I am not for auto citizenship for all the folks here illegally. ... But I agree I don't think there should be 11 million new citizens in the next few years."
Niether am I, but if you look at McCain-Kennedy, it *is* a blank check.
"I have some knowledge of the Hispanic community because of my family on my wife's side. That community has been shown to not like illegal immigration by pretty big margins. However, I have heard objections even from many that want illegal immigration stopped to some proposals."
Thank you, that's my point - being for amnesty is hardly the sole Hispanic voter position of thise who are here now, legally. You point about being sensitive to their issues is well-taken. there is a range of views as in any community, as in US as a whole. But most people are common-sense, and the common-sense position is to support reasonable levels of legal immigration and oppose excessive illegal immigration.
"I guess that is my point that this could backfire when it really doesn't need too."
You are right. Felony provision is an example. It was in HR4437, and the Republicans wanted to take it out, but Democrats voted to keep the felony provision in the bill, solely so they could have an issue to demagogue over and make the House Republican bill seem overly punitive.
"I have not bought into the idea that these illegals will be dems forever if they became citizens. For instance how many people that were granted amnesty in 1986 and their families have punched the GOP ticket at some point."
Hispanics vote about 2 to 1 for Democrats today. The poorer and less educated they are, the more likely they vote Democrat. You want more Republican hispanics? Create more middle-class hispanics, it's the only way! I am only telling you basic political reality - it will be *generations* before most of the illegals-turn-amnestied-voters become Republicans. In the mentime, the Democrats get a big boost.
Moreover, they've reaped political benefits already on this as a Republican 'wedge' issue.
"As to anchor babies. Yes you are right the parents had the kids here. Hoverever the kids had no choice in that matter. The people known as "anchor babies' are Americans and will ever be Americans."
If they have their citizenship, it's a done deal. But the fact is that there are many cases of parents using the birth of their children to 'game' the system. I dont see anything wrong with putting a name on that abuse.
" I however have no problem getting rid of birthright citizenship for future children if it can be done."
It can be done, and it would DRAMATICALLY improve the whole immigration picture, by eliminating the biggest loophole in immigration policies.
" One problem when the term "anchor babies' is used is that I don't think its clear to certain segments of the largely Hispanic community(and others) that when there is talk of eliminating birthright citizenship that is prospective only. Believe or not there are people that believe that Congress wants to revoke their citizenship. "
We cant be fully held responsible for the fear-mongering on the other side, that make people believe things that are outlandishly false.
Moreover, while there has been talk of ending birthright citizenship, it's not in HR4437 and its not likely to be on the table for discussion. Some people have the mistaken impression the 14th amendment requires it (it doesn't at all) and that impression makes it hard to make real headway on it.
"The knee jerk Bush hatred"
"What are you talking about? knee jerk? Most people don't hate Bush, they are just down right disappointed in his liberal domestic policies. ... I made the mistake of voting for his daddy---once, I feel I made a mistake in voting for Bush twice. He has not acted as a conservative at all."
Thanks for the knee-jerk response that proved Cardinal4's point!
I'll take the tax cuts, Sam Alito, John Roberts, Energy bill, pro-ANWR, more tax cuts, lower tariffs, more tax cuts, pro-life positions including passing ban on partial birth abortions, ending John Bolton to the UN to stand up to the clowns there and refuse to give blessing on their flawed Humans Rights commission that includes China and Cuba, standing up against Kyoto and earning hatred of global environmentalist/socialist movement for it, etc.
This doesn't even get into how good he's been on GWOT and in Iraq, staying the course instead of doing the lib-Dem thing and bugging out, etc.
No President give 100% of what anyone wants, but there is a lot that conservatives can be grateful for.
Saying he has not acted conservative "at all" is a witless statement to make.
"Of course that doesn,t make me happy in the least. I want a solution to the problem."
What problem? Having illegal immigration?
You have to define what 'the problem' is before you can come up with a solution.
If the problem is 'people are here who don't belong here' then it befuddles most Americans as to how the 'solution' can be 'let's let them stay and call it 'legal''.
That's not a solution, that's a copout!
"(1) It will never get Senate approval there fore the situation will just get worse. "
Conversely one can say that Senate amnesty bills will fail in the House so just drop it.
"(2) It ignores reality- we can not and this Country will not endure 11 million people many with American famillies dumped and deported by force out of here carte blanc"
Huh? This is a strawman argument. There is nothing in HR4437 that says "we are deporting 11 million people on Wednesday"... As far as "American" families... I have some in-laws who, well the situation is an immigrant who is in the process of getting citizenship has a parent here illegally, overstaying a tourist visa. This is a common act among some immigrants, some legal, some illegal. It's not cruel or wrong to shut down these kind of games. Rules are ignored because they are not enforced.
Here's the realisitic scenario:
Border security stepped up means fewer border crossers;employment verification means less hiring of illegals; ending driver licenses for illegals and making sure no welfare benefits go to illegals will make it so that many will simple self-deport. This wont happen overnight, but gradually over several years. As we deport each and every illegal alien that comes in contact with the law, the numbers will reduce.
"(3) If my point 2 was attempted the Hispanic community would vote against the Republican Repub nominee in 08 and others thus making the situation worse."
Hispanics are 12% of the vote, and they vote 2-to-1 for Democrats already, and support this policy at a higher level than their vote for Republicans. Any loss here is hypothetical, whereas the opposition in conservative base to amnesty is real, palpable and huge; amnesty would depress the base and create an electoral rout in november. Bottom line: Passing HR 4437 and making it into law would *help* not hurt the GOP prospects in November 2006 and 2008.
The REAL threat is the illegal voting where citizenship rules are ignored in voter registration. If we can shut that down, we can shut down thousands if not millions of fraudulent votes. If we dont, the Democrat machine will manufacture victories galore in some areas (LA, AZ, south Texas, etc.)
IMHO if the 3rd part of your solution were diligently carried out the first two parts would be greatly simplified and almost unnecessary. Especially the wall, which I don't believe would do much good under any circumstances. Unless the guards enforce a shoot to kill policy such as the Soviets employed at the Berlin Wall, desperate people are very ingenious when it comes to crossing walls and fences.
IMHO the primary focus of any new law or policy should be on the employers who knowingly employ illegal labor or unknowingly because they neglect to properly check out the potential employee's status before hiring.
I know that is difficult to do in many situations. My brother in law is a building contractor who uses mostly subcontractors to do the actual construction. Almost all his subs are Hispanics who of course hire Hispanic immigrant labor. He says that since he only contracts with the subs and doesn't employee the workers himself he is not responsible for determining the legal status of the subcontractor's employees. I feel that he is passing the buck so to speak, but in fact he probably could not build houses if he insisted on checking out every worker the subs hire.
Even so, I believe that if the penalties were made stiff enough and if the government made concerted effort to enforce our immigration laws comparable to the effort it makes to suppress illegal drugs, employers would do whatever it takes to avoid incurring a massive fine, or even prison time if that's what it takes to obtain compliance with the law.
Hispanics don't leave their families and homes, risk death in the deserts, and pay "coyotes" absurd sums of money it took years to accumulate to come here just because they like to exist on Big Macs or because they enjoy sleeping a dozen to a room in flophouses. They come because they are desperate for jobs that pay many times more than they can make at home. They send 20 billion dollars back to families in Mexico each year, and that will multiply almost exponentially if nothing is done about the problem. Take away that primary incentive by strictly and harshly enforcing the law against employers who use illegal immigrant labor either deliberately or through negligence and I believe you will take away at least 80-90% of the illegal immigration problem.
I forgot to ping Stinkie to post 119 and so in the interest of civility.
Stinkie!
Ping!
Of course you are quite correct. The failure over the years has been lax enforcement in all areas. Toward that end, we must place obstacles in the way of that lax enforcement. Building a wall and evading that wall is comparatively easy without enforcement.
Perhaps those of us who support a wall see it as a way of channeling the problem into smaller areas. If the load is placed more unevenly on a small area, those local officials will scream "Unfair" loudly. They may even do something constructive, instead of "sanctuary city" designations. Hence my urge to build the wall.
Sheriff Arpaio In Arizona may be a good example of that local enforcement. A sheriff who takes responsibility for the observance of laws in his area.
What a concept!
The real answer of course lies in Electing better politicians in our primary elections. Failing to do that leads us to the "hold your nose and vote option.
My Texas Senators could be more steadfast, and I feel they are willing to vacillate into Shamnesty if there is no large vocal opposition to it.
My congressional district doesn't even have a Republican candidate.
So I vote in primaries, I attend precinct caucases, I become a delegate to the state GOP convention, I Voice my opinion on forums, I criticize what I think is bad policy when I see it. Last I have no option but to vote Gop in November.
There is However one thing at which I will draw the line:
I will not vote for John McCain!
President Bush HAS done the above, as much as I disagree with many of the the positions he has chosen to stick with.
Many years ago while just a young'un during a discussion, I noted that in this country the rich and the poor have some of the same problems, one being they think they're "entitled" to whatever they want. The Bush's now seem to think they're "entitled" to the presidency. They're not.
The establishment of family dynasty's in the presidency and or the ruling class is un-American in my book.
"Perhaps most importantly, it is time for the Third World to start dealing with its own problems (like corruption and overpopulation), and stop trying to dump those problems on the U.S."
Here, here. Bush, Frist, et al. seem to think we can solve the world's problems by bringing their people here. We end up importing not only their people, but also their problems. I'm tired of seeing my country turned into the third world. I never expected to see a president as weak and ineffectual as Carter, but now suspect Bush is trying to outdo him in those categories.
So stop hangin' around lefties.
I'm a native. Bush is a Texan, whether you or your liberal buddies like it or not.
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.