Posted on 06/10/2007 9:29:31 AM PDT by PlainOleAmerican
If you like bi-partisan compromise and “progress” in the form of more legislation, you’re going to love this…
Since pretty much every member of congress seems convinced that simple enforcement of the existing immigration laws (that they passed) won’t work, and that rights for illegal aliens is a higher priority than the rights of legal law abiding Americans, some form of amnesty is bound to pass sooner or later.
Despite Washington’s marathon effort to screw the American citizen, the Wall Street Journal reports, “By a vote of 33-63, the Senate fell far short of the 60 votes that would have been needed to limit debate on the immigration measure and put it on a path to passage. Republicans -- even those who helped craft the measure and are expected to support it -- banded together to oppose that move, while a majority of Democrats backed it.”
But they will be back, we know this… So we need to cut a deal while we still can.
I propose a single simple amendment to the amnesty bill that might make amnesty acceptable for most Americans, members of congress not included most likely.
(Excerpt) Read more at greatamericanjournal.com ...
No need to... I’m good with a rifle.
Different related subject:
Am I mistaken, or is Congress the only legal institution that gets to judge itself? Set their own salary and benefits. Eject members for cause?
That needs to change. This is more pressing than the illegals issue or terrorism. Congress exacerbates or enables most of our current problems. They aid and comfort all enemies...
And it's impossible to get rid of them.
Yes, I saw they beating those leftist scum who desire open borders, an open secular society and new proletariat voters took in the 2006 election...
Your next plan?
Not personal here either, just pointing out reality.
I understand that, and that is how it should be. My objection is that the 1986 amnesty was supposed to be the last ever, shortly after that was implemented there was an ever increasing flow of illegals coming into the country, to insure that they were here for the next amnesty. If there is another one time amnesty, that will convince anyone who ever wants to come here that it will happen again, the border will be over run with people having to get here for the next amnesty.
We have just been told by the head of the Border Patrol that it will take five years to secure the border. Millions can cross the border between now and then.
You tell me?
Great idea... not exactly an original thought, but one I’m on board with.
Now, what’s your plan to get Washington on board?
They won’t go for the no voting rights either, but is sure shows what their motivations are...
That is the solution!!
Yep ... no more anchor babies!
Also, no surrender to terrorists just because the can fool a few naive Americans into believing they’re part of a “civil war”.
Work hard to take out all the RINOS in the next primary election.
Impeah Bush!
Ask George Bush. He was governor for almost 8 years when the invasion started.
Sovereign?????????Don't make me laugh. Again ask George Bush who appointed A. Gonzales, the incompetent one as attorney general from Texas. Guarding our borders. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did you ask your state legislature to secure your state?
No I didn't. Maybe you can help poor me,. Do I get down on my hands and knees and pray for them to secure my state? Do I curtsie? Do I give mordidas? If so, how much. Help. help, Is this the new American way????????????
And you will get Washington to do this how?
Still lacking the Constitutional Amendment to end the concept of “anchor babies”.
Congress is governed by the people, who keep electing fools, frauds and traitors to congress.
The people are responsible for congress... no getting around it.
To fix congress, you have to first fix the people electing congress...
No?
That's a starting point.
Si Podemos!
During the 1950s, however, this "Good Old Boy" system changed under Eisenhower - if only for about 10 years.
In 1954, Ike appointed retired Gen. Joseph "Jumpin' Joe" Swing, a former West Point classmate and veteran of the 101st Airborne, as the new INS commissioner.
Influential politicians, including Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson (D) of Texas and Sen. Pat McCarran (D) of Nevada, favored open borders, and were dead set against strong border enforcement, Brownell said. But General Swing's close connections to the president shielded him - and the Border Patrol - from meddling by powerful political and corporate interests.
One of Swing's first decisive acts was to transfer certain entrenched immigration officials out of the border area to other regions of the country where their political connections with people such as Senator Johnson would have no effect.
Then on June 17, 1954, what was called "Operation Wetback" began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.
By mid-July, the crackdown extended northward into Utah, Nevada, and Idaho, and eastward to Texas.
By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 illegals had left the Lone Star State voluntarily.
Now, to me, that's in the neighborhood of 1,200,000 in three months.
By my cyphering, we can get rid of the mere 6,000,000 claimed by the doofuses --- in about 12 months!
Of course, not if we keep buying into the mindless "It's impossible!", "Can't be done!" --- and never try. Isn't that called a self-fulfilling prophecy in the universe of the real?
Securing our border will take 5 minutes if we stand our army on the southern border...
We’ll do it for Baghdad, why not for America?
You won’t but what is suggested doesn’t solve the problem because it requires that new immigration laws be enforced. If the old ones aren’t enforced why would one assume that news ones would be.
Aside from that flaw, a future Congress or its members can’t be prohibited from legislative action by the legislation of an existing Congress.
Lack of enforcement?
Are you reading or guessing?
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.