Posted on 06/07/2006 7:46:22 AM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
LAREDO - In a parking lot of the Border Patrol headquarters three miles from the dividing line with Mexico, President Bush on Tuesday accused his opponents in the immigration battle of stirring up fear with false claims about amnesty.
"Look, if you're one of these types of people that basically say, you know, throw them out, then you just use the word 'amnesty,' just toss it around," Bush said. "In order to frighten people, you just say 'amnesty.' "
Standing with Gov. Rick Perry after a tour of the Laredo Border Patrol Sector's video surveillance program, Bush stepped up his criticism of lawmakers back in Washington balking at his call to create a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who have lived in the country for years.
It was a fine line Bush tried to walk. Earlier in the day, at a tour of the Border Patrol training facility in New Mexico, Bush struck conciliatory tones and said both sides in the debate have more common ground than differences.
"I know when you watch your television or listen to the radio it seems like there's nothing but disagreement on immigration policy in Washington," Bush told Border Patrol agents in Artesia, N.M. "Yet there's a growing consensus ... that fundamental reforms are needed."
Looking for middle ground
Bush was in Laredo as part of a two-day trip highlighting immigration issues, as Congress prepares to iron out the differences between somewhat contradictory measures passed in the House and Senate.
"There's no question this is a difficult issue for some in Washington, D.C., but my job is to continue calling people to account," Bush said.
He supports a Senate bill that includes a guest worker program, tougher border enforcement and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants who have spent years in the U.S., with a requirement that they pay fines and back taxes and show a proficiency in English.
Both of Texas' Republican senators, Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn, voted against the legislation.
"The failures of the 1986 amnesty live on today, and we will need to work very hard to avoid a repeat of those mistakes," Cornyn said Tuesday as lawmakers returned to Capitol Hill. "My hope is that this summer we'll find a middle ground solution that controls illegal immigration and addresses the 12 million illegal immigrants without granting amnesty."
Last December, the House passed a bill that would make it a felony to enter the country illegally or to help those that do. The bill would also increase border security and strictly enforce immigration laws.
To build support for his guest worker and citizenship proposals, Bush has taken a tough stand on the law and order aspects of border enforcement, including calling for more walls and fencing along heavily trafficked areas of the border.
Rep. Henry Cuellar, a Democrat from Laredo, said residents in his community want protection — but not a wall.
"I think people feel that, when it comes to border security, we say 'heck yes,' " Cuellar said. "But when the discussion turns to building a wall, that's a big no."
Chatting with the locals
Laredo, with a population that is 94.9 percent Hispanic, is the most Hispanic city in the United States, according to the Census Bureau.
Cuellar said that generally, he hears support from his constituents for a requirement that new immigrants learn English. There is also concern, he says, about a threat to jobs from continued illegal immigration.
"They want a guest worker plan, but with controls," he said. "They want security, but they don't want to see Minutemen."
While in Laredo, Bush made two unscheduled stops, pulling the motorcade over on a main commercial street to visit briefly with schoolchildren, and stopping at a Mexican-style barbecue joint to meet with residents and border guards.
"¿Como estas?" Bush greeted patrons at Cotulla's, a restaurant decorated with deer heads. "You know your governor?" he asked, gesturing at Perry.
"Howdy," Perry said, greeting a family having dinner.
Such encounters, carefully planned but unannounced, are part of a larger White House strategy to remind Americans why they once liked him so much and use his personal popularity to help sell a controversial immigration program.
Ray Keck, president of Texas A&M University International in Laredo, said he supports much of Bush's plan, but thinks more economic help for Mexico also would ease illegal immigration woes.
"We are heartened by the president's plan. We must look for a policy that would allow these people to become legal, tax-paying residents, a profitable part of our national workforce," Keck said.
Sensenbrenner said again for the 100th time a few days ago he's not signing off on any "path to citizenship". He must be one of those back in Washington Bush was referring to.
He has a Harvard/Yale education, yet this guy can barely form a complete sentence.
I would not sign it either.....its illegal..period...make the fines tougher every year...today $3,000...in two years $20,000 and 10 years in jail...then see if the illegals leave...they will and would...but the politicians would NEVER pass something that works...I am a disgusted American
Nope. Dubya just does not get it. We have a path to citizenship now and millions of people have gone through the difficult, expensive, process. They start the process from their home countries by applying to the American consulate.
If you notice that's exactly the direction every other country in the world is taking, including Mexico yet we're supposed to follow the destructive "path to citizenship" line. Thankfully the House isn't buying it.
Let's see, he wants to give them immunity from the existing laws, money they don't deserve, a path to citizenship without going through the regular channels and let them jump ahead of people who are trying to become legal residents and citizens by following our laws and he says this isn't amnesty. How stupid does he think we are? Pretty damn stupid from the looks of it.
To call the Senate bill simply 'amnesty' can be misleading. It is not FULL amnesty. However, it is PARTIAL amnesty. To say it's not amnesty at all is simply a lie. I don't think it's possible to state this too strongly. There will be some kind of amnesty. (There's not enough political support for even a reasonable application of current law on illegal immigration, i.e., no amnesty at all.) It won't be FULL amnesty. The real question is what degree of amnesty.
An Ivy League education isn't what it used to be. :)
When 70% of this country realizes that we need to take steps to control illegal immigration, maybe Bush should remember he is the President for only all LEGAL Americans and stop this nonsense.
But, then again, maybe people are calling it amnesty because that is what it is.
And illegal aliens already have a path to citizenship. They can apply just like anyone else. What the President and Democrats in the Senate are trying to pass is a PRIVILEGED path to citizenship which rewards criminals simply because they've violated our borders already and have been able to elude law enforcement authorities long enough to qualify.
Toss that around, Mr. President.
Here's an idea: Send the National Guard to Fox's palace and ORDER that the Mexican government WILL allow american oil companies to drill for oil in a country with one of the largest proven oil reserves in the world.
Whazzat you say? You didn't know our outrageous oil prices are due to Mexico's refusal to allow foreign oil companies to explore and profit from their finds?
The wall Mexico has built against oil exploration is higher than any wall ever conceived of by our border patrol. Further, the standard of living in Mexico, if all the new oil royalties were not looted, would be as high as ours.
The usual penalty for illegal entry or violating terms of a visa is removal from the United States..anything less is amnesty, if they don't go to jail but are just removed, I guess one could also call that partial amnesty...but being allowed to work and stay here is a reward and is more than being forgiven, it is more than amnesty. Rob a bank and keep the loot ? What do you call that?
And just where did you read this? Not in that article. He has clearly said that according to his plan, the illegals would have to go through the same vetting procedures as legals (criminal background checks, employment certifications, etc.), but they would have to pay a fine for breaking the law and would be placed in line behind those who are legally coming in.
No - I don't say toss them out.
I say take away the job opportunities by putting the screws to those that hire illegals. I say take away all government benefits such as food stamps, welfare, free medical care, waiver of out-of-state tuition, etc. I say if we quit making it easy and profitable for them to stay they will leave of their own accord.
If I break into a house and I am caught, I do not get to keep the property I have taken unlawfully. The property will be taken away from me.
If I commit bank fraud and I am caught, I do not get to keep the money I have obtained unlawfully. The money will be taken away from me.
If I commit tax fraud and I am caught I do not get to keep the money I retained by fraud. This will also be taken away from me.
If I steal someones identity and get caught, I do not get to keep the forged drivers license, birth certificate, and checks. These are taken away because they do not belong to me, even though I may have paid to have them forged.
If an alien enters this country unlawfully, or illegally stays after entering lawfully, then they are an illegal alien. They should not get to keep their residency here in this country (which was obtained illegally). Their residency should be taken away from them.
If they DO get to keep their residency here, or get some sort of advantage over those who have waited in line, then this is amnesty. Amnesty by any other name is STILL amnesty.
The concept is simple, but some pretend not to understand.
Sadly, it reminds me of Clintoon arguing over the definition of the word "is".
I agree and say that the senate bill is "amnesty plus." Mere amnesty would be saying "cease and desist, but we won't penalize you for your past violations of law" (unlike, for example, the UAE, which IIRC levied a fine on people in the UAE illegally - equal to something like $30/day for each day they had been present). "Amnesty plus" says "continue on as you have, and we won't penalize you for past violations of law.'
No Mr. President, I get scared when you continue to propose amnesty. Please reconsider your position.
Officer: I clocked you travelling at 88 mph in a 65 mph zone. We don't tolerate such flagrant violations of the law in the Great State of XY.
Motorist_1: Sorry officer, but I'm not from here. I was just violating the limits that the residents of XY are no longer willing to violate.
Officer: How long have you been doing this?
Motorist_1: About 6 months.
Officer: Enjoy your visit in XY and speed no more.
Officer: I clocked you travelling at 94 mph in a 65 mph zone. We don't tolerate such flagrant violations of the law in the Great State of XY.
Motorist_2: Sorry officer, but I'm not from here. I was just violating the limits that the residents of XY are no longer willing to violate.
Officer: How long have you been doing this?
Motorist_2: About 5 years.
Officer: Can you prove it?
Motorist_2: Yes, I have a receipt for the purchase of my fake drivers license in April of 2001.
Officer: Very well, enjoy your visit in XY. Put this bumper sticker on your car and you will be free to continue at 94 mph and not get pulled over.
Oh, an amnesty.
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.