Great....the article title is going to have Hell Bent For Leather in my head for the remainder of the day. Side effects of misspent youth.......
Posted on 01/24/2007 9:30:44 AM PST by VU4G10
While liberal interest groups were quick to criticize President Bush's State of the Union comments on issues ranging from the war in Iraq to the environment, conservatives were also upset as he continued to push for immigration reforms that they claim go easy on illegal aliens.
While Bush reported that he is doubling the size of the Border Patrol to monitor the U.S. border with Mexico and pledged to enforce immigration laws at the workplace, his temporary worker proposals are still a touchy subject for his conservative base.
"We should establish a legal and orderly path for foreign workers to enter our country to work on a temporary basis," Bush said in his seventh State of the Union address Tuesday evening. "As a result, they won't have to sneak in, and that will leave Border Agents free to chase down drug smugglers and criminals and terrorists."
Bush added: "We need to resolve the status of the illegal immigrants who are already in our country without animosity and without amnesty."
But some conservative immigration groups argue that Bush's policy amounts to amnesty.
"With the change in congressional leadership, President Bush is hopeful that 2007 will be the year he finally succeeds in passing a guest worker amnesty plan that has been consistently rejected by the American public and the majority of his own party," the Federal for American Immigration Reform (FAIR) said in a release.
FAIR President Dan Stein said Bush's "radical immigration agenda ...is designed to satisfy business's demands for an endless supply of low wage labor" and argued that it will hurt "Americans who work for a living, who pay taxes, send their kids to public schools, care about the environment or who believe that a nation is more than just a random collection of people who happen to share a piece of geography."
U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., a longtime critic of Bush's position on immigration, also slammed the president's State of the Union remarks in a statement released Tuesday.
Suggesting that Bush tried to "guarantee a Congress sympathetic to his 'amnesty for all' plan" during the 2006 elections, Tancredo said the new Democrat-controlled Congress "seem[s] hell-bent on cramming this mass amnesty down the throats of the American people whether they want it or not."
Tancredo also questioned Bush's pledge for increased enforcement of immigration laws, saying that "one or two high-profile raids are not proof of a commitment." He was referring to the recent Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids on six meat-packing plants that resulted in more than 1,200 arrests and 148 charges related to identity theft.
"What we are looking for from the administration is the same degree of energy expended in the enforcement of our immigration laws as they used to seek out a drug dealer in Mexico, so he could be brought back to testify against border patrol agents who were trying to do their job," Tancredo added, referring to two border patrol agents now in prison for shooting a Mexican drug smuggler.
While conservatives are angered with Bush's stance on immigration, proponents of a guest worker program are cautiously optimistic that Bush and the Democratic Congress will work together to pass legislation enacting it.
"Immigrant communities have learned to appreciate the speeches," the Fair Immigration Reform Movement (FIRM) said in a statement, "but we have become sorely disappointed in the follow-through."
"For immigrant communities, actions speak louder than words: Human and comprehensive immigration reform can begin to heal the breach," FIRM said. "While President Bush and congressional leaders have expressed sincere intentions for this year, immigrant communities are taking nothing for granted. We are preparing to work harder than ever to ensure that President Bush lives up to his promise and that the new Congress performs differently from the old one."
As is this president.
If a candidate insists on being a one-issue candidate, he better be shooting off fireworks all the time on that one issue.
****
Congress is Hell
Great....the article title is going to have Hell Bent For Leather in my head for the remainder of the day. Side effects of misspent youth.......
....... and?
"that will leave Border Agents free to chase down drug smugglers"
LOL! Not if they are in the slammer.
As I understand it, any Senator can put a 'hold' on any bill in the Senate.
If any of the Senators are truly anti-illegals, they should be able to put a hold on an amnesty bill. They didn't last session.
That becomes the real question: Does any Senator have to backbone to stop amnesty?
Ironically, Senator Byrd (D-WVA) stopped the amnesty bill, on a technicality. It almost passed shortly after the 9-11-01 attacks.
the Border Agents that is.
I don't have a problem with a guest worker program. What I don't want is to give citizenship (or a path to) millions third world persons. I'll invite them to come and work, but not vote.
Actually, what is needed is at least 41 senators to filibuster in the senate. If there is not a filibuster proof minority then the senate will vote and most likely pass the immigration reform that the President wants. I believe that there will have to be some compromise between amnesty and enforcement only. Nobody gets everything they want in the legislative process, and I think something is better than nothing which is what occurred in the last Congress. If people don't want to understand this, then they are not being realistic.
This is the biggest fraud because it is politically impossible to do. Over 495 of the Fortune 500 have illegals ... probably all 500. I've worked in a large number of big IT shops. Every one had illegals.
Does anyone really think that it is politically possible to come down on these employers? It would force even more IT development offshore
Then there are the millions of homeowners who pick up illegals at Home Depot to work on their house. Does anyone think that it is politically possible to come down on these small employers?
One of the big problems of the immigration debate is that all sides make absurd comments that lack any credibility. The result is the debate really goes nowhere ... except for an occasional token raid or symbolic bread crumb.
These two are contradictory. Remember NAFTA and a hundred other bills?
A vanilla bill is proposed. Then it is loaded with earmarks, pork, special inclusions and exclusions. The only Free Trade thing left in the NAFTA bill was the name. By the time is had passed both houses, it was not recognizable as a Free Trade bill, except in the name.
Mass Amnesty and current or increased immigration rates spell the end of the GOP as a viable national entity within 50 years. Why do they not get this? They are writing their own death sentence.
Ah-hah!!!
I was right!!!
Politicians can only see as far as the next election, and you expect them to worry about 50 years from now?
BWAHAHAHHAHA!
Nothing of substance will ever be done about illegal aliens, deal with it, forget about it, adjust to it, and move on.
ping
One-issue candidate?
http://tancredo.house.gov/issues/
"Does anyone think that it is politically possible to come down on these small employers?"
Hopefully so. it would be the best thing to happen for legal legitimate business owners. Let's even the playing field, by all means
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.