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

Skip to comments.

Immigration Prospects Brightening
Powerlineblog ^ | 5/28/2006 | John Hinderaker

Posted on 05/28/2006 10:29:28 AM PDT by Jameison

The Washington Post reports this morning that prospects for the Senate's immigration package are dimming, due to House members' concerns about November's election:

Republican House members facing the toughest races this fall are overwhelmingly opposed to any deal that provides illegal immigrants a path to citizenship -- an election-year dynamic that significantly dims the prospects that President Bush will win the immigration compromise he is seeking, according to Republican lawmakers and leadership aides. Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) will not allow a vote on a House-Senate compromise that does not have the support of most GOP lawmakers or one that would undermine the reelection chances of his at-risk members, aides said. According to GOP lawmakers and strategists, about 75 percent of the 231 House Republicans are steadfastly opposed to the Senate bill or even a watered-down version of it.

The Post's article cites poll's that supposedly show strong support for the administration's plan, but, as one House member says, "they must not be polling anyone in [my] District."

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aliens; elections; imigration; immigrantlist; limbaugh; rush; thehouse; ushouse
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-167 next last
To: Rokke

because you couched your point in a slanderous insult. Duh.


81 posted on 05/28/2006 12:27:12 PM PDT by steel_resolve (George Bush, why hast thou forsaken me?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Jameison
Meanwhile Mexico itself maintains some of the most rabid immigration laws on the planet.

A point that the pro-open borders lobby and RNC hacks fail to understand.

82 posted on 05/28/2006 12:27:15 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Conservatism is moderate, it is the center, it is the middle of the road)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
"Interesting that the Senate vote turned out like it did. Either the Senators who voted "yes" are ignoring their voters, or they voted in response to what they are actually hearing from their constituents and not relying on internet blogs. "

# 1. Republican majority in the Senate voted against the Senate Immigration Bill.

#. All RATS Senators voted for the evil Senate immigration Bill apart from 4 of them.

# 3. Those only 4 RATS that voted against the immigration Bill, were all up for reelection this year.

Even the RATS can hear what voters are telling them...sometimes.
You don't really have a point, dude.
83 posted on 05/28/2006 12:27:33 PM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: khnyny

The Senate bill would allow up to 3 million such immigrants per year - you think we need MORE than that?


84 posted on 05/28/2006 12:28:41 PM PDT by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
"our son will be a freshman in high school this fall and wants to attend the Naval Academy as well"

Then he's starting his preparations at the right time. It is worth the effort it takes to get in.

85 posted on 05/28/2006 12:28:57 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Rick Deckard
Was that picture taken from the US side? The next time that I am down in San Diego I must go and actually see the wall.
86 posted on 05/28/2006 12:29:09 PM PDT by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Jameison
# 1. Republican majority in the Senate voted against the Senate Immigration Bill.

If that were true, it would not have passed.

87 posted on 05/28/2006 12:30:47 PM PDT by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Rokke

We've actually homeschooled him up to this point, so he is way ahead - time for AP classes and sports, etc. See you around.


88 posted on 05/28/2006 12:31:56 PM PDT by clawrence3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
Thanks for the history lesson,

You're welcome. But not one word about the culpability of the rest of the states for nominating activist judges to the federal courts?

You want liberal judges. Vote democrat. Apparently, California is happy with the judges they have.

I wouldn't say that.
89 posted on 05/28/2006 12:33:28 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
Dick Mountjoy, is running against Feinstein? Time for Californians to put their votes where their mouths are.

Will he be supported by the Republican party, or will they pull the rug out from underneath him, like they did to McClintock to put in socialist democrat Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor?
90 posted on 05/28/2006 12:35:19 PM PDT by hedgetrimmer ("I'm a millionaire thanks to the WTO and "free trade" system--Hu Jintao top 10 worst dictators)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
"You are just making stuff up aren't you? Most of those legal immigrants are house cleaners and nannies. End of story"

Yeah?
Here is the "huge" number of "house cleaners and nannies" immigrants to Taiwan right here for ya.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/imm_net_mig_rat

Guess who's making stuff up here?
91 posted on 05/28/2006 12:38:32 PM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
From your link:

Americans, Republicans, and conservative Republicans actually support comprehensive immigration reform, and they will not take it lightly if the enforcement-only crowd burns down the bill, rather than acquiesce in creating a path to citizenship for the illegals already here -- as supported by 80% of Americans and over 75% of Republicans.

This matches a Gallup poll from earlier in the month.

I guess it's just not true that most voters, indeed, most Republicans, support an "enforcement only" approach.

And "no bill" could cost the GOP the House.

92 posted on 05/28/2006 12:38:43 PM PDT by sinkspur ( Don Cheech. Vito Corleone would like to meet you......Vito Corleone.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3

You misunderstood my point. I am against illegal immigration and "amnesty". Standards about who is allowed to immigrate to the US have to be maintained and enforced. That's not happening now. Currently, we have chaos, thanks to our folks in Washington and Mexico.

If we have rampant crime, increased poverty and taxes, talented people will think twice before deciding to immigrate to the US. The continued wave of illegals from Mexico will eventually lower the standard of living and reward the Rats with more "voters". Why reward illegality? Educated, talented people from countries other than Mexico have to jump through hoops in order to get to the US.


93 posted on 05/28/2006 12:39:39 PM PDT by khnyny (Time for US immigration policy to adapt to the 21st century)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett; Blake#1
Please clarify your position. Are you saying the USA is doomed unless we allow the inflow of people in limitless numbers, regardless of skills, literacy, education, poverty, criminality, or health? With illegal immigration, that's what we have at the moment. Would you just like to make it official policy?""""

How long will the Republican Party survive if we allow tens of millions of underclass immigrants to come to the US legally over the next decade or two? I don't think Kennedy has proposed this bill because he expects these newcomers to vote Republican. Do either of you - JJ or B#1 - expect these folks to be anything other than reliable Democratic voters? If you don't, you're smoking something. Bottom line: Underclass immigration on the scale that the Senate Bill would permit, would mean an end to the GOP, an end to American traditions of limited government, and a new era of Mexican-style socialist corruption in vast parts of the US.

94 posted on 05/28/2006 12:41:08 PM PDT by churchillbuff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Iscool

"Uh, most Americans don't want to be part of your movement..."

You seem to be attributing some silly thing that Blake#1 said in post 13 to me.

Wake Up Boy!


95 posted on 05/28/2006 12:41:09 PM PDT by babygene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: ncountylee; Rick Deckard
Was that picture taken from the US side? The next time that I am down in San Diego I must go and actually see the wall.

Yup, it looks like it was taken on the US side, about 3 miles west of the Imperial Beach shoreline, facing west.

96 posted on 05/28/2006 12:42:08 PM PDT by Vision Thing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Jameison
"# 1. Republican majority in the Senate voted against the Senate Immigration Bill."

Yet, it wouldn't have passed without Republican support. Are you saying that the Republicans who voted for it blissfully ignored the desires of their constituents?

"Those only 4 RATS that voted against the immigration Bill, were all up for reelection this year."

First, that isn't true. Second, 2 of the three who were up for reelection are not in the least bit vulnerable in their states (Byrd and Nelson), so they weren't voting to save their seats. Only Stabenow from Michigan could be considered vulnerable.

"You don't really have a point, dude."

Yet, I keep disproving what you say.

97 posted on 05/28/2006 12:45:09 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

So help me understand... Are you supporting the Kennedy/Democrat immigration bill that just passed in the Senate?


98 posted on 05/28/2006 12:46:09 PM PDT by babygene
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: clawrence3
"If that were true, it would not have passed"

It is, and it did, with massive suppiort from RATS vermin.


"Democrats, including Chuck Schumer and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, voted 39-4 in favor of the bill. Three of the four Democrats who voted no are up for re-election.

Republicans, in defying President Bush, who favors legalization, voted against it by 32-23. "


http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/64270.htm

99 posted on 05/28/2006 12:46:24 PM PDT by Jameison
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer
"But not one word about the culpability of the rest of the states for nominating activist judges to the federal courts?"

First, States don't nominate Federal Judges. Presidents do. And the rest of the States aren't blaming California for their problems. Instead, they are trying to elect Presidents who will appoint more conservative judges. I'm sure they would appreciate it if California would help in that effort.

100 posted on 05/28/2006 12:48:35 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-167 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