Posted on 06/16/2007 6:40:40 AM PDT by kellynla
During a speech last month to Georgia law enforcement officials, President Bush opined that opponents of the stalled immigration reform bill “don’t want to do what’s right for America.” If they only understood the bill’s provisions, he implied, they would see the light. But, alas, they hadn’t “read the bill” and could only “speculate” about its complex provisions. He warned them to stop trying “to frighten people.”
These unscripted remarks unleashed a torrent of criticism from the president’s political base. Conservative talk-show hosts, pundits, bloggers and grassroots activists seized on the criticism as an opportunity to educate Americans on the bill’s many flaws. Constituent mail and phone calls poured in. Ultimately, a hardy band of conservatives forced Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to pull the bill after two weeks of angry debate.
Last week, the president ventured to Capitol Hill to dine with Republican senators in a high-profile attempt to revive the bill. But he converted no one. With congressional leaders scheduled to consider other legislation guaranteed to further annoy and divide the president’s supporters (e.g., reauthorizing the No Child Left Behind Act and approving the sovereignty-stripping Law of the Sea Treaty), the question arises as to whether the president’s immigration dilemma -- having to thread the needle between openly hostile conservatives and the usual assortment of Bush-haters on the Left -- will be the norm for his remaining 18 months in office.
Several recent polls underscore the extent of his challenge.
According to a survey by the Pew Research Center, the president’s overall approval rating fell six points between April and June (from 35% to 29%). But the drop was most intense among Republicans (from 77% to 65%), including conservative Republicans (from 86% to 74%), and Independents (from 34% to 22%).
Another poll, conducted by Gallup after Bush’s Georgia speech, found a similar drop in his standing among GOP loyalists, where his positive rating hit a near-record low of 70% (alarms sound whenever a politician scores below 80% with his core supporters). According to Gallup, the only other time Bush’s GOP approval rating was so low was about a year ago when -- you guessed it -- the Senate was angrily debating comprehensive immigration reform. Hmmm.
“It was the debate over immigration,” pollster Scott Rasmussen confirmed last week, “that cost the president support among his base and pushed his approval ratings to new lows.”
Political operatives are well aware that the disenchantment over immigration has settled primarily on Bush and those lawmakers who have led the charge in the Senate. Sen. Reid’s approval rating sunk 7 points in a month, to a microscopic 19%. John McCain (R-Ariz.) fell in many presidential polls. Yet the national GOP emerged unscathed, and may even have benefited, from the turmoil.
A month ago, Rasmussen reports, Democrats enjoyed a 14-point advantage (47% to 33%) as the party best able to handle immigration. Following the Senate debate, however, the Democrats’ advantage shrunk to only five points (40% to 35%). “Immigration,” he concludes, “is now tied with taxes as the GOP’s strongest issue” and is “the only issue on which unaffiliated voters trust Republicans more than Democrats.”
What explains the intensity so many Republicans and Republican-leaning Independents bring to this issue? My guess is that this is yet another manifestation of the ideological divide that separates Red from Blue America. Because Republicans are more reflexively pro-American than their Democratic colleagues, they place a much higher value on U.S. citizenship and therefore are more likely to vigorously oppose policies they perceive as granting citizenship too freely, especially to lawbreakers.
For example, polls demonstrate that Republicans are more likely than Democrats to say they are “very patriotic” and more likely to see America as a place where “most people living in other countries would like to live.” Also, by a 2-to-1 margin, Republicans believe “we should be willing to fight for our country … right or wrong.” A majority of Democrats disagree. Finally, Republicans attach more importance to the rule of law than Democrats do. Republicans are much more likely to want to penalize employers who knowingly hire illegal aliens and banks that offer them credit cards.
The disenchantment with Bush can be summed up in an L.A. Times/Bloomberg poll, which asked Republican primary voters whether they want the next Republican nominee for president to continue Bush’s policies or move the country in a new direction.
They opted for a new direction by the overwhelming margin of 65% to 27%.
actually— no—not true...
the Dem Leaders— yes—
but not the dem voters. The Dem voters are OVERWHELMINGLY against amnesty- and favor enforcement and building the fence.
This is one issue where Dem voters and Republican voters are both coming together and realizing that the folks in DC do NOT go to Washington to actually REPRESENT THEM....
Bush needed to have more things in place before he declares Martial law. If he can get riots between the illegals and the citizens, martial law will be requested by the citizens.
Hillary is the only one allowed to carry this baton, it cannot go outside the Bush Clinton Cabal.
Start recalling senators, get it stopped and vote.
I’m voting for Ron Paul, may be a long shot not worth the vote, but if your going to throw your vote to someone you know will not beat Hillary at least it’s a vote of NO CONFIDENCE. With enought votes of NO CONFIDENCE, Ron would win.
It’s the Constitution stupid...
_______________________________________________
So, Jorge's aim is to create a new and permanent underclass or 'working poor', is this what you are saying? Sounds like it to me. Let's not think about the burden the existing class of working poor is. Why mess-up your wet-dream...
Of course your suggestion assumes that these 'undocumented Americans' are either unwilling to or incapable of moving out of the lowest levels. Why? Because they're Mexicans?
People managed to read the bill, even though the many minor provisions were kept pretty quiet until they could no longer be concealed, and they STILL don’t like what it says.
Too many things, making too many promises that shall never be kept. Other things just swept under the rug, maybe fix it later, but “later” never comes.
Do the right thing. Break the bill into its constituent parts, and there is a chance most of it will be carefully considered, and passed or rejected on its merits, not because of a stampede.
Even if NOTHING gets done on this monstrosity of a proposal, there is a considerable body of existing law that covers practically all the same things, and is already in place. Just enforce the provisions of that existing authorization, including the mandate to BUILD THAT CUFFING FENCE.
The name Bush will be rembered as a legacy of corruption for the true conservative.I believe that Bush was much more conservative in 2000 than he is now. Something happened between then and now.
That’s right, and if the party doesn’t dump Bush I will dump the party.
Shut up and pay your taxes! /s
“That’s right, and if the party doesn’t dump Bush I will dump the party?”
well it’s a little too late to “dump him”;
we’re just gonna have to make damn sure the next guy is a dyed-in-the-wool true blue conservative.
Why....sure, and I like doing that, too.
What I’m suspicious of is the growing tendency for Washington to ignore the people, and just push ahead with whatever agenda they have decided “is best for us”. Doing something that is guaranteed to fracture the Republican party is a sure-fire way to guarantee a Democratic victory in the presidential race in 2008. You can bet that Democrats are working hard for just that outcome, and the mis-steps and deafness on the part of Republicans to the will of the people makes me wonder whether there is in reality a “shadow government” behind the scenes who dictates how things will go, and orders the principal players how to act, speak, and what to do to further that already-decided-on outcome. There’s entirely too much of the “doofus act” being put on by Senators and Representatives who should be intelligent enough, and cautious enough to realize that actions have consequences, and the solution to the country’s woes is not to create enven more laws and regulation.
This country is sliding down the slippery slope to Socialism, and the only difference between the Democrats and Republicans seems to be how fast we slide down that slope. No one is trying to stop the slide. Not the President, not the Congress, not the States, not even the Local Governments. They all seem hell-bent on destroying the freedoms we once had, and rushing headlong into Socialism. They’ve all drunk the Statist Kool-Aid and have bought the idea that people are too stupid to run their own lives, and need the nanny State to take care of them, make the important decisions for them, and redistribute wealth to level the playing field, all so we can be uniformly miserable, when we wake up and realize what we willingly gave away, because we thought “it can’t happen here” and “it won’t happen to me”.
I trust politicians as much as I trust snakes and scorpions, which is to say, not at all. It’s time to throw the rascals out, every last one of them.
“People managed to read the bill?”
I doubt anyone actually read all eight hundred plus pages...
but we sure found out about all the PORK and what we didn’t want passed that was in the bill!!!
“This country is sliding down the slippery slope to Socialism?”
With half of the people in America receiving some kind of government assistance;
I’d say we’re well on our way!
“Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink.”
P.J.O’Rourke
They keep telling us this is NOT an amnesty.....it seems they don't read the dictionary..if it looks, quacks and walks like a duck, it's a dirty, ugly pig of an amnesty bill.
am·nes·ty –noun 1. a general pardon for offenses, esp. political offenses, against a government, often granted before any trial or conviction.
2. Law. an act of forgiveness for past offenses, esp. to a class of persons as a whole.
3. a forgetting or overlooking of any past offense. –verb (used with object) 4. to grant amnesty to; pardon.
Welcome to FR UltraDude... I was just wondering why you are so sure we will “have amnesty”?
I was also curious about your suggestion on another thread about using the troops to “Naturalize” citizens??? What are you implying with this statement:
***********************
Senate Leaders Agree to Revive Immigration Bill
Posted by UltraDude to driftdiver
On News/Activism 06/15/2007 4:16:00 PM CDT · 38 of 43
This is what we need to do: abolish the INS because it has become dysfunctional, scrap Homeland Security (FBI, ATF, CIA),
scrap the already border wall that is there, send in the troops, and use the troops to naturalize citizens. It is safer, faster, and cheaper.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1850945/posts?page=38#38
*****************
You also mentioned this “solution” the day before yesterday on another thread... I’m totally against illegal immigration and amnesty, but your comment leaves me a little worried. Please explain... Thanks.
They are not running things, they are being told what to do, how to do it, and how to hide the real agenda. Hence, the "doofus act" many of them put on.
ping
I believe the presidents follow the big directive of the CEO, but they have the control on the petty issues that draw the emotional attention from the populace. This keeps anyone from looking at the bigger picture.
We’ve been in this situation for a long time, I would estimate since Kennedy was killed. I believe that Carter was the only one that wasn’t in the Cabal and that’s why he looked like such a moron. He wasn’t included in the overall plan because he was kept outside and was not trusted to implement orders. The only thing that Carter did was implement the petty rules and was butchered for the rest.
This is all going to come to light as promised. My prayer and expectation is “All that is hidden in the dark, please bring it to light”. That prayer works, but be prepared for the hurt it brings.
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.