We Need 7-10 More Votes to NO on Cloture Next Week (Shamnesty)

The Cloture rule kills the filibuster. That is why getting 41 votes against cloture is needed. We can hope that there is one Senator who can outsmart the little weasel Harry Reid.

They can either be PATRIOTS or PARIAHS. We need more PATRIOTS.

12 SENATORS LEANING NO ON FINAL PASSAGE BUT PROBABLY LEANING YES ON CLOTURE (when it counts)

This is such a chicken s*** cowards approach. They know full well the ramifications of their vote on cloture and just want to be able to tell their constituents they voted against amnesty.

12 SENATORS LEANING NO ON FINAL PASSAGE BUT PROBABLY LEANING YES ON CLOTURE (when it counts)

This is such a chicken s*** cowards approach. They know full well the ramifications of their vote on cloture and just want to be able to tell their constituents they voted against amnesty.

That's why when you call, fax, email or mail your Senator you have to insist on a NO vote for Cloture... and that you're well aware of the "Yes on Cloture, No on the Bill" ruse that some Senators are going to pull. They probably could have gotten away with this 10 years ago, but not in the New Media age. We're on to their tricks!!

Looks to me like he had a Visa. Looks to me like the Catholic Church helped in the right way on this one . .

This is just what I am questioning!

It is difficult for an born American citizen to understand the legal process to be an Immigrant. The scrutiny that you have to go through in your home country, to supply a ton of family history, of yourself, your parents, your employers, all your previous residences since you were born, certificates of births, marriage, deaths, and a whole lot more papers BEFORE you can even be eligible to get an interview with a Consular Officer at the U.S. Embassy or General Consulate!

It took me 3-1/2 years to go through that process before I could get a visa

Do you think that was possible in Castro's Cuba? I THINK NOT!!

Mel was "SENT" at the age of 15. How was he "SENT" without a valid visa??

He was sent on out on a mission that Castro apparently did not opposed, but never the less or under what circumstances he came here, he did NOT went through the LEGAL immigration process.

But it sounds very nice on his web site: "Was sent at age 15."

Here are some excerpts I found about this issue:

===========================================================

Neither program could have functioned without U.S. government support. Responding to a request from Father Walsh, the State Department immediately arranged for the British government to allow Cuban children to fly to Jamaica using British visas. From there they would travel directly to the United States. To streamline the process, State Department officials-in a highly unusual step-then persuaded the Justice Department to give Father Walsh authority to issue visa waivers to the Cuban children he and James Baker wished to transport. Such waivers, normally granted only in emergency situations, soon allowed Pedro Pan children to fly directly from Havana to Miami on commercial flights. The State Department also aided the program by allowing Walsh and Baker, who returned to Cuba, to communicate via diplomatic pouch.

In discussing the U.S. government's eagerness to assist Walsh and Baker, Triay argues that timing was important. When Walsh met with State Department officials in early 1961, the CIA was preparing for the Bay of Pigs invasion, which depended on the participation of the Cuban antiCastro underground. According to Triay, a large number of these operatives were willing to fight only if their children's safety could be assured. Therefore, not surprisingly, theirs were the first children served by Operation Pedro Pan. After the failed invasion, Triay argues, the State Department lost enthusiasm for the program, but allowed it to continue because it facilitated the emigration of middle- and upper-class Cubans, causing a brain drain that the United States hoped would undermine Castro. In addition, assistance to Cuban refugees of all kinds demonstrated to other countries in the hemisphere the U.S. resolve to help communism's "victims" (p. 29)

. Why the Cuban government allowed this exodus of children, whose secrecy could not be maintained for long, is less clear. Triay suggests that Castro saw emigration as an effective means of ridding the island of potential dissidents. Triay believes, moreover, that forcibly preventing the movement would have generated negative publicity for the regime, playing to the U.S. charge that Cuba had become a totalitarian state.

The question of just how influential these rumors were is important in assessing the value of Operation Pedro Pan. In his enthusiastic defense of the program, Triay argues that it succeeded because it gave parents exactly what they wanted: the opportunity to protect their children from a communist state. Viewed from another angle, however, Operation Pedro Pan gave these parents the opportunity to act on their wildest fears in a moment of mass panic, prompted largely by false rumors and a deliberate program of misinformation. If Baker and Walsh had never organized the program, it is possible that after the initial hysteria had subsided and the rumors proved unfounded, parents could have made better-informed decisions about their children's future. Very likely, most of them would have ultimately opted to emigrate. But such a process, while certainly difficult, would have spared them and their children the trauma of separation.

It’s a unique way to get into the country.

I’m afraid that you are correct on this one. I have pretty well lost all faith in Bush. I don’t get it, never will.

In the Battle of Thermopylae of 480 BC, an alliance of Greek city-states fought the invading Persian Empire at the pass of Thermopylae in central Greece. Vastly outnumbered, the Greeks held back the Persians for three days in one of history's most famous last stands. A small force led by King Leonidas of Sparta blocked the only road through which the massive army of Xerxes I of Persia (Xerxes the Great) could pass. After three days of battle, a local resident named Ephialtes betrayed the Greeks by revealing a mountain path that led behind the Greek lines. Dismissing the rest of the army, King Leonidas stayed behind with 300 Spartans and 700 Thespian volunteers. The Persians succeeded in taking the pass but sustained heavy losses, extremely disproportionate to those of the Greeks. The fierce resistance of the Spartan-led army offered Athens the invaluable time to prepare for a decisive naval battle that would come to determine the outcome of the war. The subsequent Greek victory at the Battle of Salamis left much of the Persian Empire's navy destroyed and Xerxes was forced to retreat back to Asia, leaving his army in Greece under Mardonius, who was to meet the Greeks in battle one last time. The Spartans assembled at full strength and led a pan-Greek army that defeated the Persians decisively at the Battle of Plataea, ending the Greco-Persian War and with it the expansion of the Persian Empire into Europe.

The performance of the defenders at the battle of Thermopylae is often used as an example of the advantages of training, equipment, and good use of terrain to maximize an army's potential,[5] and has become a symbol of courage against overwhelming odds. Even more, both ancient and modern writers used the Battle of Thermopylae as an example of the superior power of a well trained army defending native soil.

There is also a large political significance of the Battle of Thermopylae, in that it was the first defining moment in which the disunified Greek city states first came together to form a significant alliance. It also possibly signified the beginning of the end for the Persian empire - drawing strength from the Battle, the Greeks began forming assaults against the Persian Empire, as a national body rather than small city states.

Spartan King Leonidas: This is where we hold them! This is where we fight! This is where they die!

Spartan King Leonidas: The world will know that freemen stood against a tyrant, that few stood against many, and that before this battle is done, that even a god king can bleed.

Spartan King Leonidas: Then what must a king do to save his world when the very laws he has sworn to protect force him to do nothing?
Queen Gorgo: It is not a question of what a Spartan citizen should do, nor a husband, nor a king. Instead, ask yourself, my dearest love, what should a free man do?

Persian Officer: Spartans, lay down your weapons.
Spartan King Leonidas: Persians! Come and get them!

Queen Gorgo: I am not here to represent Leonidas; his actions speak louder than my words ever could. I am here for all those voices which cannot be heard: mothers, daughters, fathers, sons - three hundred families that bleed for our rights, and for the very principles this room was built upon. We are at war, gentlemen. We must send the entire Spartan army to aid our king in the preservation of not just ourselves, but of our children. Send the army for the preservation of liberty. Send it for justice. Send it for law and order. Send it for reason. But most importantly, send our army for hope - hope that a king and his men have not been wasted to the pages of history - that their courage bonds us together, that we are made stronger by their actions, and that your choices today reflect their bravery.

	From: Roy Beck, President, NumbersUSA
	Date: Monday 25JUN07 3 p.m. EDT

Great job today -- Pour it on rest of aft and Tuesday morning

DEAR FRIENDS,

If you haven't tried to place a call to your Senators today (or haven't been able to get through), please do so right now. (See lists below for where we see your Senators leaning right now.)

Rosemary Jenks (our NumbersUSA director of government relations) just called me and said her team of lobbyists is reporting that the White House has dispatched officials at the highest level to "buy" votes.

She said Senate staffers are confirming that the Administration is offering various favors of all kinds to Senators who have publicly committed themselves to a NO on cloture but who might be willing to switch votes and to Senators who haven't declared themselves yet.

"We'll have a pretty good idea after the vote tomorrow which Senators sold," Rosemary said.

Senate offices should have no question where their constituents stand -- and that is the opposite of what the White House is buying.

You have already sent more than 50,000 faxes to your Senators today.

(That was after sending 35,491 faxes on Sunday, 34,755 faxes on Saturday and an incredible 109,823 faxes last Friday.)

Your NumbersUSA TV and newspaper on-line ads continue to target Senators in more than a dozen states. Click here to view many of them.

Our date with destiny is Tuesday morning (tomorrow) at 11:30.
That is the schedule for dealing with two unrelated bills, including the cloture vote to allow the S. 1639 Kennedy/Bush Comprehensive Amnesty Bill back on the Senate floor.

Your NumbersUSA team of lobbyists -- and our allied organizations and Senate staffers -- feel that at this time we are 5 votes short of killing this monstrosity of a bill in the first round.

But those last five are proving to be extremely difficult votes to get. Constituency pressure is proving to be about the only thing that works -- and it has worked remarkably well in places like Georgia, Texas and even beginning to work in Michigan.

The good news is that the No. 2 Democratic leader, Sen. Durbin (D-Ill.), has said he doesn't believe he can get more than 37 of the majority party to vote for the amnesty. That means the Republican leader, Sen. McConnell (R-Ky.), must persuade 23 of the 49 Republicans to go against their base and support the amnesty. And McConnell himself still isn't committing to a YES for the amnesty.

The pro-amnesty forces must get 60 Senators to vote YES tomorrow to keep the bill alive. The grassroots citizen army of people like you is the only thing that has gotten us this close to stopping the Kennedy/Bush plan.

TAKE YOUR ACTIONS
ACTION 1: Phone Your Senators

Senate Switchboard: 202-224-3121

All DC and local phone numbers for all Senators:
http://www.numbersusa.com/congressinfo/

2. ACTION 2: Fax Your Senators
www.NumbersUSA.com/actionbuffet

PEEL OFF MORE DEMOCRATS
I am so proud of all of you Democratic members of NumbersUSA who report heavy phoning of the Democratic National Committee, warning it of the political dangers of allowing the party to be solidified in the public mind as the party of amnesty.

And most of you are pledging to withhold any more donations to your Party if it continues to make amnesty a Democratic Mandate. (Thanks to all of you Republicans who are making the same pledge to the RNC.)

We think the message is starting to get through in many Democratic offices. The authoritative Roll Call newspaper reported today that the No. 2 Senate Democratic leader "Durbin has warned Republicans repeatedly that Democrats will be able to muster no more than 37 votes of the 60 needed to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to the bill."

Durbin said: “Thirty-seven votes is our high-water mark. We may not be able to get that again.”

I believe you can whittle that number down before tomorrow.

DNC: 202-863-8000

We can win this fight if you can persuade NO on cloture vote out of the majority of these six Democratic Senators who are leaning against S. 1639, but who won't commit to a NO on cloture:

Bingaman (D-N.M.) -- voted NO on cloture two weeks ago
Boxer (D-Calif.) -- voted NO on cloture two weeks ago

Conrad (D-N.M.) -- voted YES on cloture but concerned about violations of the Senate budget process

Levin (D-Mich.) -- voted YES on cloture two weeks ago, but up for re-election next year and perhaps influenced by the state's junior Sen. Stabenow who has pledged a NO on cloture.

Nelson (D-Neb.) -- voted YES on cloture two weeks ago but NO on the amnesty last year. He campaigned for re-election last year as an anti-amnesty candidate. Problem is that he generally votes for cloture as a matter of principle to allow issues and candidates to get their debate. He needs to be helped to feel secure in a NO vote because the way S. 1639 is being brought up violates normal procedure and that the debate already occurred in May.

Webb (D-Va.) -- voted NO on cloture two weeks ago -- says he will likely vote NO on final bill but may vote YES on cloture to see if his amendment passes -- his amendment would reduce the number of illegal aliens getting amnesty by perhaps a third -- most people who know him well feel he has a great distaste for this whole matter of rewarding illegal behavior, as do most Virginians.

THESE DEMOCRATS HAVE PROMISED A 'NO' ON CLOTURE

Baucus (D-Mont.)
Byrd (D-W.Va.)
Dorgan (D-N.D.)
Landrieu (D-La.)
McCaskill (D-Mo.)
Pryor (D-Ark.)
Rockefeller (D-W.Va.)
Sanders (I-Vt.)
Stabenow (D-Mich.)
Tester (D-Mont.)

If any of those are your Senators, please keep calling and ask them not to accept any favors from the White House.

And please keep the pressure on all other Democrats to listen to the AFL-CIO's opposition to this bill and vote NO. I know that we have already provided you with the text of the letter of Samuel Gompers, the founder of the AFL, when he made the case for protecting American workers and unions from massive flows of foreign labor.

PERSUADE A FEW MORE REPUBLICANS?
The following list contains the Republicans most favorable toward voting NO but also who may be most susceptible to the favors the White House is selling this afternoon.

REPUBLICAN SENATORS LEANING NO ON FINAL PASSAGE BUT PROBABLY LEANING YES ON CLOTURE (when it counts)
Please do everything you can to get to these Senators and help them understand what is at stake and where the citizens of your state stand.

Bond (R-Mo.)
Burr (R-N.C.)

Cochran (R-Miss.)
Ensign (R-Nev.)

Gregg (R-N.H.)
Hatch (R-Utah)

In addition, there still is a remote chance you can persuade:

Bennett (R-Utah)
Coleman (R-Minn.)

32 DEFINITE REPUBLICAN 'NO' ON AMNESTY CLOTURE
Many of you will find ways to express tremendous appreciation and to help solidify them so that no offer from the White House or party leadership can turn them at the last moment. We know that White House and other Administration officials are meeting this afternoon and evening with some of these to change their vote.

Alexander (R-Tenn.)
Allard (R-Colo.)
Bunning (R-Ky.)

Chambliss (R-Ga.)
Coburn (R-Okla.)
Corker (R-Tenn.)

Cornyn (R-Texas)
Crapo (R-Idaho)
DeMint (R-S.C.)

Dole (R-N.C.)
Enzi (R-Wyo.)
Grassley (R-Iowa)

Hutchison (R-Texas)
Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Isakson (R-Ga.)

Roberts (R-Kan.)
Sessions (R-Ala.)
Shelby (R-Ala.)

Smith (R-Ore.)
Sununu (R-N.H.)
Thune (R-S.D.)
Vitter (R-La.)

ALL OTHER SENATORS NOT LISTED ABOVE APPEAR TO BE PLANNING TO VOTE TO HELP PASS A BILL THAT WOULD BE:

largest amnesty for illegal aliens in history

largest increase in foreign labor in history

largest expansion of social welfare programs in history (to handle the 35-40 million -- mostly low-educated, low-skilled -- foreigners who would get Green Cards over the next 20 years alone

All those Senators need your constant phoning, as well. A few could still be brought to the side of American workers, students and communities and vote NO on the amnesty. And the rest need to be shown full wrath to help the others decide to stay on the side of the voters.

If you have any information that indicates otherwise, let us know by sending us a message from our Help Desk page.

KNOW YOUR SUBJECT

You have plenty of talking points on your Action Buffet corkboard and on your Vote Day page.

THANKS,

This may be a good time for you to make sure that you've let us know all of the areas you are interested in. In order to further customize the type of alerts you receive click here http://www.numbersusa.com/survey?action=longlist

As a NumbersUSA subscriber, you will receive occasional emails about immigration-related opportunities. If you want to increase or reduce the frequency of these emails, click here and choose from Total Activism, Moderate Activism, or Limited Activism at the bottom of your registration form: http://www.numbersusa.com/user

NumbersUSA - relies upon individuals like you to reach its goal of an environmentally sustainable and economically just America.

I don’t know what’s up with the moderators here at FR, but for some reason they either move this stuff to the back-burner or they delete the entire post (as they did with the update above).

Should I take it that Jim Rob has put his support behind the White House and this crap legislation?

Lou Dobbs reports that McConnell will vote YES for cloture. What is the mechanism for removing a minority leader from his position?

She said Senate staffers are confirming that the Administration is offering various favors of all kinds to Senators who have publicly committed themselves to a NO on cloture but who might be willing to switch votes and to Senators who haven't declared themselves yet.

Cloture tomorrow must not be a sure bet otherwise why would the WH be attempting to bribe Senators who already publicly committed themselves to voting no? We got to keep hammering away, I think we can win this thing.

I don’t know. Kind of boring lately. Doesn’t change much. I’m sure they have their reasons though. Ask them. They are usually very nice, if you are.