Bush Defends Planned Path To Citizenship

Maybe a separate thread that solicits input from our great FReeper network to fashion an anti-amnesty position that covers all bases.....there must be no stone left unturned.

That sounds like an excellent idea, if you want to start one be sure to put me on any ping list you might have.

Maybe some more good news from National Review and Lowry, who always seems to get a hold of the latest inside information:

"From a Republican congressman: House Republicans are even more determined not to compromise, since the Bilbray victory is being interpreted in light of immigration. “The position of the conference is even more hardline.” His guess is that “there's not going to be a bill.” Certainly “nothing involving amnesty and legalization.”

I especially like this line:

"He's not impressed with Bush's pro-enforcement push. Bush is clearly just thinking “how much do we have to give these crazy Neanderthals to make them happy.”

:) It appears Bush doesn't have many friends in the House at the moment.

Wasn't Bush ever told "No" as a kid? He could care less about American workers who could never compete in a guestworker shamnesty program that would bring in millions of foreign workers (from everywhere, not just Mexico) to compete against them. I have never seen a President who does so much to harm the people he is suppose represent and to put all his capital on the line for foreigners (or corporations) whom he is suppose to not represent. I totally question his loyalty to Americans.

I feel personally hurt that the President used such strong unnecessary language to describe the opponents to Shamnesty as proposed by the Senate.

Doses this mean that the 87 plus percentage of American citizens against a disastrous bill are racists?

Thank God the founders of this country knew what they were doing when they sat up the three branches of government.

Thank God they were even smarter when they set up the two houses.

One to represent the people and one to represent the wishes of the country.

Lets hope the house sticks with it's guns and kills the Shamnesty bill in it's tracks.

I got a call today from a political poll asking one question, whether I approved or disapproved of President Bush's job....call was oddly from Political Call Center, Tempe, Arizona (I live in San Diego)..nice timing just after Bilbray's big ANTI AMNESTY WIN....too bad they didn't ask my opinion about McCain too LOL, I could have gotten two gooney birds with one call....

The fat lady is singing this morning. Even the WSJ can read the handwriting on the wall:

Opposing amnesty "a winner for Republicans" - California Reprieve
The Wall Street Journal ^ | June 8, 2006 | Editors

In politics, it's easy to mistake a mere reprieve for something more substantive. So Tuesday's election results in California shouldn't give Republicans, or Golden State taxpayers, the idea that they're out of the woods this election year.

The GOP won what it's hoping is a bellwether House race in San Diego County to fill a seat that opened when former Congressman Duke Cunningham was caught taking bribes. Republican Brian Bilbray defeated Democrat Francine Busby, 49% to 45%. But it's not a good GOP omen that the National Republican Congressional Committee had to spend $5 million on the contest and that Ms. Busby hurt herself with a late-inning gaffe. Last week she told a Hispanic audience that "you don't need papers to vote." She later tried to clarify the remark, but talk radio and cable news played up the comment and surely helped put her opponent over the top. If this is what it takes for the GOP to hold its "safe" seats, Democrats have reason to be optimistic.

Mr. Bilbray made immigration the centerpiece of his campaign, which isn't surprising for a former lobbyist for the restrictionist Federation for American Immigration Reform. Distancing himself from President Bush's guest-worker approach, Mr. Bilbray called for constructing a wall "from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico." Some conservatives are touting his victory as proof that anti-immigration is now a winner for Republicans, and they may be right this year. But they'll have a more convincing case when this result can be reproduced in a district where Republicans don't outnumber Democrats by 3 to 2, and have to outspend them by 2 to 1...

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...

But they'll have a more convincing case when this result can be reproduced in a district where Republicans don't outnumber Democrats by 3 to 2, and have to outspend them by 2 to 1...

Man, this completely mirrors the Dem spin on the special election.

When Bush is siding with Ted Kennedy, and the WSJ is sounding like the DNC, you would think both would re-think their stance on this issue. Apparently they are more concerned with keeping the supply of cheap labor coming than in winning elections.

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.