Posted on 09/04/2006 5:48:05 PM PDT by RobFromGa
Edited on 09/05/2006 1:53:36 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 — As they prepare for a critical pre-election legislative stretch, Congressional Republican leaders have all but abandoned a broad overhaul of immigration laws and instead will concentrate on national security issues they believe play to their political strength.
With Congress reconvening Tuesday after an August break, Republicans in the House and Senate say they will focus on Pentagon and domestic security spending bills, port security legislation and measures that would authorize the administration’s terror surveillance program and create military tribunals to try terror suspects.
“We Republicans believe that we have no choice in the war against terror and the only way to do it is to continue to take them head-on whether it is in Iraq or elsewhere,” said Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the majority leader.
I agree. Or at least I think we agree. Bush and his "party" have give The People a big wedgie where immigration is concerned. Instead of kicking the criminals out, they're salivating over how many potential voters they are importing. All their "potential voters" are either going to blow us up or vote to secede to Atzlan. And Bush & Co. want us to think that immigration and the war on terror are not related. Phhhhttt! At least Clinton *says* didn't inhale. I'm not so sure about this current crowd.
Oh yea. That whole "AFTER we've already voted" thing gets us every time. That's when everybody that was just voted in starts back tracking with uhhhh, errrrr, hmmmmmm.
The words they DON'T say before the election mean a hell of a lot more than the words they contrive after being elected.
It's just as well. What Bush and Congress want to do with immigration is worse than the status quo.
Exactly.
Yep... and yep
Not all of us...
:)
There must be a lot of stupid people out there huh?
Well, the good news is that the GOP appears to be a bit more educable than the 'Rats. The GOP tends to learn from losing. If enough maybe the party will stop trying to foist them on us.
"Repubs could have come up with another House bill embraces all security and enforcement matters, with guarantees Bush wouldn't defund it, with time to "study" amnesty and worker programs, and run on that issue, for one. Distinguishing themselves from Bush would also help divide their association from him as an unpopular president. Especially needed because it looks like Bush is going to keep his face on TV in his "take charge" mode and Dems will easily reply he hasn't secured Iraq and offers no new ideas. Iraq is not a winner for Republicans."
If the Republicans follow your line of thinking, the Senators will distinguish themselves from the House of Reps and vise versa.
That is a looser for anyone who is not a liberal.
"The House Repubs had an opportunity to frame the debate with a new bill, or demand Bush fund prior authorizations, and distinguish themselves from Bush. They could even corner the Senate with promises of later talks about guest worker plans for their lobby moneymasters."
First of all, why should the House come up with a new bill? What is it about the current bill they passed that you do not like?
Second, what prior authorizations are you talking about?
Third, if the House distinguishes itself from Bush, it will not be seen as them seperating themselves from an unpopular President, it will be seen, by almost everyone as a division in the Republican party which will benefit the Democrats.
Forth, your suggestion that the House corner the Senate will, again give the impression that the Republicans are divided and will help the Democrats.
Wouldn't it just be easier for you to vote straight Dem in November?
"BOTH Parties have the same view on Immigration now: Open Borders For All."
Have you read the bill passed by the US House of Representatives? It is not open borders for all.
"First of all, why should the House come up with a new bill? What is it about the current bill they passed that you do not like?"
Felony provision for one.
"Second, what prior authorizations are you talking about?"
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2005/02/09/MNGOKB837T1.DTL
Third, if the House distinguishes itself from Bush, it will not be seen as them seperating themselves from an unpopular President, it will be seen, by almost everyone as a division in the Republican party which will benefit the Democrats.
Inside the beltway thinking has it set that parties must present a borg-like front. But really, people vote on the person in Congress races. Gone are the days of slow communication. It will also point out that Democrats are divided on the issue too. That only Republicans are is a noxious talking point fronted by Rove.
"Forth, your suggestion that the House corner the Senate will, again give the impression that the Republicans are divided and will help the Democrats."
No it won't. People will be impressed that the House is sticking up for them.
"Wouldn't it just be easier for you to vote straight Dem in November?"
IMHO, you're on the wrong page.
"The Repubs have a failing grade on Border Security. If they won't govern with 3 branches, then I won't cry if they only have 2 branches."
How are they to govern with 3 branches now, when they only have some control of 2 branches (The Executive branch, and the Legislative branch)?
The leadership of the party, the president, is for open borders as are the senate republicans. They set the direction of the party. The representatives in the House just haven't fallen in line yet.
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.