Posted on 06/02/2007 2:52:24 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Bush scolds balking GOP
By Stephen Dinan and Ralph Z. Hallow THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published June 2, 2007
President Bush yesterday renewed his attack on Republicans who oppose his immigration bill, again charging that they are trying to "frighten people" and calling on supporters to rally around the compromise.
The president pleaded with senators to "show courage and resolve" to withstand outrage from voters in their districts.
"It is right to argue for what you believe and recognize that compromise might be necessary to move the bill along. And it is right to take political risk for members of the United States Congress," Mr. Bush said in his second impassioned plea this week on the issue and the second time that he has accused Republicans of trying to scare voters by labeling provisions in the bill an "amnesty."
But many Republican senators say the bill is both an amnesty and unworkable and argue that Mr. Bush's barbs are off the mark.
"I'm not going around frightening people. People are frightened, and they're trying to scare the politicians into voting the way they want them to," said Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, whose opposition to the bill has earned him standing ovations at speeches and events back home during the past week.
Mr. Bush's challenge followed a speech in Georgia on Tuesday that infuriated Republican opponents of his bill. And the renewed challenge came just a day after White House press secretary Tony Snow said the administration was trying to "lower the temperature and get people to talk about basic principles."
The fight is taking a serious toll on Republicans. The Washington Times reported yesterday that small donations to the Republican National Committee have dropped by an estimated 40 percent
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
That is funny- where’s he been?
Not that I miss him...
‘it is right to take political risk for members of the United States Congress’
Maybe already been said but my head hurts this morning and I can’t wade thru all the comments (all of which say everything I am feeling about this asinine mess and a president I used to call ‘my’ president) but it ISN’T RIGHT TO TAKE POLITICAL RISKS WITH THE SAFETY OF OUR COUNTRY.
I am so po’d I can hardly think straight. I guess the ignorant blind morons in DC are looking forward to an entirely Democratic leadership for the next 20 years because if there isn’t a drastic change, and if that bill is not defeated, that is exactly what is going to happen.
In Ohio, when I work late, I pass a completely hispanic cleaning crew coming in to the office, rather than the Vietnamese that I used to see - I always want to ask them if they have their green cards, but I have managed to bite my tongue so far. The crew is never chatting in English, only Spanish.
Bill Whittle http://www.ejectejecteject.com/
excerpt
Large numbers of non-citizens want to live in the United States. Large numbers. A society can only assimilate so many people in a given year. If millions and millions of people come here illegally, they are loading the system to capacity at the expense of the honest, decent people who are doing the right thing by applying to immigrate legally. If we reward illegal immigration with amnesty, we have allowed the illegals not only to screw our own people and laws, but even more so they harm their own countrymen who are trying to get here by cooperating.
**** The biggest losers in our inability to control illegal immigration are the legal immigrants. What benefit do these honest people gain from playing by the rules? This is as clear a real-world example as you are likely to see of the lack of retaliation flipping a system from cooperation to betrayal.
And, by allowing this to happen, you also set a precedent, which I think is even more destructive: you are saying not only to the illegals but to the entire society that laws are for chumps. Cheaters win.
I remember returning their donation request forms in 1998 with "CLOSE THE BORDERS!" scrawled all over it in big black Sharpie.
Oh, and without a check.
He and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the bill is the result of a number of tradeoffs. They challenged opponents to put forward another solution that takes account of what Mr. Chertoff called "real life, as opposed to theoretical arguments about what would be nice."1. Fence
Probably because his opposition, especially the Clintons, know a lot more about what happened a few years back in and around Mena, Arkansas, involving themselves and George I, than his own party members do.
There is one amnesty I do favor.
Amnesty for US Border Patrol agents sent to prison for doing their sworn patriotic duty.
But that’s one amnesty neither Presidente Bush nor Soldado Snow seem to have the slightest interest in.
“Why is it that the proponents of this terrible bill always say “ we can’t possibly deport 12 million criminal immigrants” We have many more than 12 million people who smoke pot in this country, and yet we don’t hear the same argument about them? “
Exactly. The list is long...the liberal “war on poverty” is another example. Or the “war on crime”. The liberal way to make war on something is to make more of that something. More poverty, more illegals, higher health care costs, you name it....because then they can employ more of themselves in government bureaucracy to wage the war. These illegals are a gold mine for government bureaucracy. Money money money.
Not so to the rest of us who have to foot the bill, all the while losing our nation, our culture, our quality of life and our very souls to this invasion.
I have several donation request letters in a little stack that I’m saving. I’m holding my fire and waiting. I hnow what to say when the time comes.
If any politicians get a chance to read this, take your dunce caps off a moment and consider:: Bush has no political future, has the lowest public opinion rating challenging that of any President in history, will not be in office after 1/20/2009, could possibly be removed from office from dereliction of duty before his current term expires, and might never hold another national office of public service; is THAT the example YOU want to imitate?
Please think a little before you consider taking your "political risk" and upon the validity of which you must make that decision....
And the Republican party, as a whole, will suffer a huge, gigantic loss for many years to come over this.It's already suffered a huge, gigantic loss. You wait. The words "better than Hillary" won't cut it in 2008. If a RINO wins the nomination, a huge number of conservatives will either sit out the election or vote 3rd party.
I'm not advocating this, I'm just stating it as a political fact of life. The RINOs who run the national party are probably too stupid to look that fact in the face, but there it is, staring right back at them, whether they chose to acknowledge it or not.
“Worst Republican President ever!”
Bush was definitely a bad choice in the 2000 primaries. Not being familiar with the administrations of all sitting republicans, I would tentatively have to agree with your assessment. Bush will likely go down as the republican equivalent of Jimmy Carter, or the man who broke the nation.
“You took the road of the “least harmful” rather than actually voting FOR Bush.”
Well put. But I guess what’s nagging me is whether he actually has been the “least harmful” choice? I think on the WOT, at least from a philosophical perspective, he clearly was the only choice. But philosophy is merely a parlor game if you can’t convert philosophy into effective action.
I suspect that our President really does not understand the basis for the outrage by his former base. My concern is broader and deeper than the issue with illegal immigration. My concern is with the integrity of our lawmakers; that is, the ability of our government to actually keep a promise. With respect to the issue at hand, the more important problem is NOT how to deal compassionately with illegal aliens already here, as we did in 1986. The more important problem is to SECURE our borders. It seems like our lawmakers (both Republicans and Democrats) prefer OPEN borders, and, perhaps, one world classless government.
By repeatedly failing to implement promises to secure our borders, we have compounded the problem seven fold. Most recently the Congress placated the desire of the people for a border fence by including it in legislation, then pulled the rug by failing to provide funding.
You stop the leak before you get out the mops and buckets. In 1986 when Reagan granted amnesty to illegals without securing our borders, what we have today is what many lawmakers wanted, only instead of three million we have 20 to 193 million illegals. We encouraged more foreigners to illegally enter our country. By placing those already here in the front of the line instead of dealing with the source of the problem, we are reapplying a failed policy. The Republicans apparently want to get on the bandwagon of implementing failed policies like the Democrats.
Furthermore, the problem is deeper than that. Illegals are desired by companies because the corporations can avoid the tremendous burden of the socialistic and costly government rules and regulations and taxes for health care, workman’s compensation, meeting diversity quotas, required training (sexual harassment, diversity, safety, etc.), social security taxes, and more. Many, many years ago employers could go to the town square, pick out a few workers, get the job done, and move on. Those days are so far gone that it is hard to believe that existed at one time.
We should just secure our borders, and then take the time needed to rework our immigration policy, including how best to deal with illegals in a just and compassionate manner.
I’m not frightened, I’m pissed.
And a man who is suffering from a cranio-rectal inversion.....
He’s doing this in vengeance to heap hurt on Conservatives and Patriots.
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.