Posted on 07/03/2007 6:26:18 AM PDT by IrishMike
With the White House, the leaders of both political parties, and the media all solidly behind the “comprehensive” immigration “reform” bill, how could it be stopped in the Senate, as it was last week? The people stopped it. That is what democracy is all about.
When members of Congress began to be deluged with angry letters, phone calls, and e-mails from their constituents, they knew the game was over — and that their careers could be over if they didn’t pay attention to what the voters were saying.
This bill was an insult to people’s intelligence from start to finish, and the elites are continuing to insult people’s intelligence after being defeated.
Fraudulent arguments were followed by fraudulent procedures to rush this bill through the Senate without committee hearings, with restrictions on debate, and with the specifics of this huge bill being sprung on the Senate at the 11th hour, so that senators would be voting on something they barely had time to read.
Among the fraudulent arguments was that illegal immigrants were taking “jobs that Americans won’t do.” What that really meant was that they were taking low wages that Americans wouldn’t take.
Another fraudulent argument was that “We can’t find and deport 12 million people.”
A much bigger problem than these 12 million people are the tens of millions of additional immigrants who are virtually certain to come in, legally or illegally, if amnesty is extended.
After all, there were only 3 million illegal immigrants the last time an amnesty bill was passed, back in 1986. That’s how we got to 12 million.
(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...
Look, you’re kinda making a fool of yourself. I’m not making up his immigration stance from years ago. He hasn’t changed one iota. Unfortunately. But if you thought that he was going to be tough on Mexicans and Mexico having been governor of Texas and giving his radio address and press conferences in Spanish after his English ones while he was, and having a Mexican sister-in-law and nephews and niece, then I don’t know what to tell you.
The writing was on the wall. In more ways than one.
I assume you mean George H.W. Bush, not GWB.
Regardless, the poster alleged that GWB “made himself clear on his immigration stance before 2000.”
This is simply not true.
In other words, he lied.
I’m glad we are finally in agreement.
If you enjoy calling the President a liar, that’s your business.
Happy 4th of July.
It was a non-issue during the 2000 election. http://www.infoplease.com/spot/campaign2000issues.html#foreign
Demand a border fence! Build it NOW!! Beef up the border patrol and close our borders!
U.S. Senate switchboard: (202) 224-3121
U.S. House switchboard: (202) 225-3121
White House comments: (202) 456-1111
Find your House Rep.: http://www.house.gov/writerep
Find your US Senators: http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm
Toll free to the US Senate:
1-800-882-2005. (Spanish number)
1-800-417-7666. (English number)
Courtesy of a pro-amnesty group, no less!!
Republican National Committee
310 First Street, SE Washington, D.C. 20003
phone: 202.863.8500 | fax: 202.863.8820 | e-mail: info@gop.com
Take a look at their hidden agenda: http://www.mexica-movement.org
Respect other languages, but teach all children English. (Nov 2000)
$500M to cut INS application time to 6 months. (Jul 2000) Welcome Latinos; immigration is not a problem to be solved. (Jun 2000)
Make INS more “immigrant friendly”. (Jun 2000) High tech: More H-1B worker visas; less export controls. (Apr 2000)
Farm policy: Open markets abroad; more H-2A worker visas. (Apr 2000)
Latinos enrich us; family values go past Rio Grande. (Feb 2000)
More border guards to compassionately turn away Mexicans. (Dec 1999)
Guest workers, maybe; citizenship waiting period, yes. (Aug 1999)
I found this on http://usgovinfo.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.issues2000.org/George%5FW%5F%5FBush.htm%23Headlines
Of all his statements I found, the only one I find questionable is his statement about more border guards to compassionately turn away illegal immigrants.
You would be sorely disappointed then. Please read post #52 and follow the links. He was most definitely asked what he would do and he did NOT indicate that he would act as he is today. There was no "path to citizenship," or anything of the kind, until AFTER the election in 2004!
Orange County Register. Aug 15, 2000
BORDER ENFORCEMENTSun Sentinel. Sep 10, 2000
Bush: Supports programs such as Operation Hold the Line, which place more Border Patrol officers and resources at border-crossing points. Believes "it is far more compassionate to turn away people at the border than to attempt to find and arrest them once they are living in our country illegally."
LEGALIZING UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANTS
Bush: Opposes blanket amnesty because he believes it will not address immigration problems. Is interested in reestablishing a guest- worker program. Has said he will change INS policy so spouses and minor children of permanent residents can apply for visitor visas while their immigration applications are being processed.
WORKER VISAS
Bush: Supports lifting the current limit of H1-B visas, but believes the long-term solution to the shortage of high-tech workers is education. Supports expanding the H-2A temporary agriculture program to allow more workers.
SERVICES TO IMMIGRANTS
Bush: Opposed the "spirit" of Proposition 187 because he believes "every child ought to be educated regardless of the status of their parents." Has said he believes federal government should reimburse states for costs incurred by illegal immigration.
Here is where the presidential candidates stand on immigration and hemisphere issues:Immigration: enforcement vs. service
Both candidates want to strengthen the nation's borders to keep illegal and criminal immigrants from entering the country. Both also want to improve services for legal immigrants. They differ on how to accomplish these goals.
Bush sees an inherent conflict in having the same agency enforce laws against illegal immigration, and also provide services to immigrants. He advocates congressional action that would split the Immigration and Naturalization Service into two separate agencies, one dealing with law enforcement, and the other with services for legal immigrants.
Bush wants to attack illegal immigration "on the front end." He proposes allocating more government resources to reinforce the U.S.- Mexico border, "so states such as Texas and California would not have the huge expenses they currently do."
He also wants to make the INS more friendly and service-oriented to legal immigrants.
Bush proposes to increase INS funding by $500 million over five years to hire more employees and improve the quality of services.
Among other things, he wants to reduce the backlog of citizenship and family-reunification applications. In some parts of the country, the waiting time to become a citizen is two years or more. He proposes a six-month standard for processing immigration applications.
Additionally, he believes the husbands, wives and children of permanent residents should be granted visitor visas while the INS is handling their residency applications. Under the current system, families can be separated for 10 years while these applications are processed.
Skilled foreign workers
The booming economy has created an enormous demand for workers, which isn't being met by U.S. citizens. This has resulted in pressure on both major political parties to allow more foreign workers into the country. Both candidates support increasing temporary visas for professional foreign workers, which high-tech companies say they need desperately. Congress is considering legislation that would raise the cap on so-called "H-1B" visas for foreign engineers, computer programmers and others.
Amnesty for undocumented workers
Gore supports a Clinton administration proposal to grant amnesty to about 1 million out of 5 million to 6 million undocumented workers. This is called the "H-1B-plus" proposal because it is tied to efforts to increase U.S. visas for skilled foreign workers. The amnesty would help meet the need for low-skilled workers for the nation's farm and service industries. Gore supports allowing long-term migrants who have lived in the United States since 1986 to become legal U.S. residents and "retain their substantial ties to this country." He favors doing this by amending the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act of 1997 to include Salvadorans, Guatemalans, Haitians and others. The act currently makes it easier for Nicaraguans and Cubans to remain in the United States.
Bush has not taken a position on this partial amnesty proposal. However, he is against blanket amnesty for illegal immigrants. He supports programs instead that would allow more temporary or guest workers to enter the United States to fill labor shortages in the farming and service industries.
As I said. Nothing about making 12-20 million illegal aliens elible for citizenship at a cost in excess of $2 TRILLION dollars.
I don’t enjoy it a bit, but I won’t lie to defend him.
Facts are facts.
Gore? Now that is some twisted logic!
Let’s recap. The poster said that GWB “made himself clear on his immigration stance before 2000.”
My only contention is that that is outright false. I proved my case and neither you, nor they, have provided anything to refute it.
End of story.
This sounds kind of like hiring Nazi party members to man U.S. food processing plants during WWII. Sometimes you have to wonder what the elites in this country are thinking.
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.