[no-to-illegals]

turns out it was just a merry-go-round, after all.

LOL - yes, a merry-go-round. It looks as though the author enjoys being invaded.

[pissant]

“illegal immigration extremists”

I stopped reading right there. One amnesty in 1986 was one too many.

[packrat35]

I want them all gone PERIOD. Nothing less, at this time willl do. They have proved that they care nothing for America and are just leeching off us.

Build the damn wall, start massive deportations, employer sanctions, and the rest will leave on their own.

I have no pity or compassion for ANY of them anymore.

[donna]

Spoken from a gated community.

[pissant]

And it is not “nothing” we got. Because what is is far better than what was proposed. What you have are a number of GOP candidates that are willing to enforce the laws. That means a border fence, increased internal enforcement, going after the sanctuary cities, and deporting the illegals. Pretty simple.

[bill1952]

but a suspicion nonetheless that some of the folks who jumped on the “all or nothing, ship them back, Bush has betrayed the base” bandwagon are beginning to regret the ride…turns out it was just a merry-go-round, after all.

Nope. Its called the first shot. - Across the bows, and we intend it to come to an entirely different conclusion.

Who here actually believes that the amnesty bill would have "solved" the problem, especially under a (hillary!) and a democrat controlled congress??

Who is this kook, anyway?

[Waryone]

Two things the author got right:

1. "that’s a staggering statement when even I - a lowly and not terribly bright housewife"

2. "'the White House was not prepared for the anger of foes of illegal immigration' For crying out loud, that’s a staggering statement"

 

[ckilmer]

How do I hate this person. Shall I count the ways? They are too numerous.

Suffice it to say that all the elites have their own lawyers guns and money. they are world citizens. elite politicians generally go with elite opinion. the trouble with elite opinion is that it is generally disloyal. that’s the downside of being world citizen.

tony snow is an entirely likeable man. W is likable too. I pray that after this administration is over neither man or their family or friends ever get in politics again.

It is very doable easy and cost effective to send illegals back to their homelands. It would be a great boon to do so especially for a country like Mexico. Why? They’d get a skilled workforce who knew something about what a first class country looks like and how to get there.

[KarlInOhio]

The problem was that the Bush administration started with the "I'll gladly give you border control Tuesday for Amnesty today." This might have worked if we hadn't been fooled by it in the 1986 amnesty. If the recent amnesty proposal had gone through, I would have expected the border control provisions to be just as quickly forgotten and the thorough 24-hour Z-visa background check would have amounted to nothing more than "Do you have any easily tracked felony convictions?"

Without some major fixes, it looked like the amnesty program was worse than nothing. The failure (or success if you are on the side of the illegals) of the 1986 amnesty has poisoned the immigration well. Build the fence and shut down the border for a few years, then we can talk about what level of immigration would be best for the United States on the whole and not just some special interest groups.

[saganite]

If it were only conservatives who were angry about Bush’s bil it probably would have passed. There was broad based opposition to the bill and that’s what shut it down. It’s also THE hot button issue for the 2008 election right up there with the war. We’ll see next year whether the author is correct. I’m pretty sure cracking down on illegals is a winning political strategy for Republicans.

[SampleMan]

Let us hope so, because the alternative “solutions” out there - “let everyone in and register them all Democrat” on the left and “ship them all back to Mexico no matter how long they’ve been here or how productive” - are neither workable nor just.

The first is treasonous, the second is nothing but just. She has justice confused with mercy.

[dirtboy]

They were not interested in any sort of “half-measure” by President Bush

Half measure? The American people had ample cause to question the commitment of not just Bush, but the entire Washington establishment regarding securing the borders as part of "comprehensive" immigration reform. And the American people can look to 1987 as to what happens when amnesty is granted and security is not accomplished - it encourages even MORE illegal immigration in hopes of being here for the next amnesty. Indeed, the "reform" proposals actually rewarded the longer-term lawbreakers by having a cutoff for consideration of a track to citizenship - completely perverse reasoning.

It wasn't nativism, xenophobia, racism, bigotry or dislike of "press 2 for Spanish" that drove the opposition to immigration reform.

It was plain ol' common sense.

But seeing how common sense is in such short supply in Washington these days, one can see why the elitists cannot see, let alone understand, just what ran over their agenda.

[Will88]

“By the same token, I think it would not be completely unfair to state that the increases and excesses of illegal immigrants - and whatever political fall-out or legislative impotence comes from once more refusing to deal realistically with an issue that has been ignored for decades - will rest on the heads on those who took a hard, uncompromising line; those who managed to drop-kick the first president to try to effect positive change, and further weaken his entire presidency, while still getting nothing done.”

“the first president to try effect positive change.” Who is this Anchoress ignoramus? Doesn’t she realize that Bush’s scheme was little more than a replay of Simpson-Mazzoli from 1986, that grand amnesty bill where we immediately got the amnesty for two to three times more than expected, but twenty-one years later we’re still waiting for the tough enforcement?

Any negative political consequence will rest solely on Jorge, Rove and all Republicans who were in cahoots with them on this shamnesty ruse. After Jorge’s plans had been rejected by the Republican majority in the House year-after-year, and opinion polls showed big majorities of all Americans opposed to amnesty, it was reckless and irresponsible for Jorge to try to pass his amnesty scheme with Democrat majorities in Congress, brought on by his liberal policies and inability to communicate on Iraq. They are solely responsible for the damaging internal fight over immigration in the Republican party.

Jorge and Rove also deserve most of the blame for the Democrat majorities in Congress, and for the diminished prospects for Republicans in 2008.

[bill1952]

Compromise got us here. To this point.

To the point where we are relentlessly urged to change our laws because we do not want to enforce them.
To the point where controlled legal immigration means all out, bar no doors, galloping numbers that will change the very face and culture of America itself.

and yes, illegal immigration has no benefit, period. Unmatched social security numbers be damned.

compromise. - “snort!”

No man is above the law and no man is below it: nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it.

Obedience of the law is demanded; not asked as a favor.

Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.

- Theodore Roosevelt

[Carbonado]

Of course what little miss Anchor-ette never mentions - The same things the MSM/Leftists who try and control the framework of the debate also never mention - are respect for the law and the result of Balkanization on America. It is a very feminine thing I think to indulge in emotion-heavy, thought-light appeals to this kind of notion of “justice”. Theirs is a justice where everyone has to feel good and no one ever fails. Failure isn’t allowed because, you know, it just makes us feel, you know, bad. They never follow their thoughts through any further than reaching some desired outcome that makes them feel good about themselves, and for them that is where it ends. Any further analysis of the long term results of their actions or the effects of those actions on the society at large is non existent and for them, irrelevant.

The emotionally driven among us never stop to ask a couple of simple questions - First, in this age of government entitlements and terrorism, does any particular persons desire to come to America automatically translate into some supposed “right” to come here? For the Leftists and the emotionally driven I think the answer is undeniably yes, albeit for different reasons. Second, does a particular persons desire to come here override the native citizens desire - for whatever reason - to keep them out? Again, for the Leftists/feminists/socialists, the answer would be yes.

For all of their grand speeches extolling the “will of the people” the Liberals really only care about the will of the people when it matches their own schemes. Otherwise, the will of the people will be savagely attacked and denigrated as racist, nativist (whatever that means) and worse, which in fact we have seen in the past few months.

“and any other politicians who disagreed with them or sought a more workable solution than “ship them back and build high, high walls” had their rhetorical heads smashed repeatedly against the rhetorical curbside”

Get it? The enlightened emotives in government courageously tried for “a more workable solution”, didn’t they? Obviously they know best and we simply need to accept that. Even the author has a few noble “dents”. How courageous.

“whatever political fall-out or legislative impotence comes from once more refusing to deal realistically...”

Again, the only “realistic” solution is to give away large sections of this country and its wealth and ignore the long term consequences. See how simple it all is? Now don’t we all feel soooo good?

I am more angry by the day about the immigration fiasco and our feckless and duplicitous governments refusal to simply enforce its own damn laws. At some point, the pols and the media I think will be overwhelmed by the anger of the average citizen who feels like they’re being used as servants of the noble “enlightened”, which are code words for arrogant corrupt elitists. As to what that anger mean exactly, I just don’t know.

[penowa]

Let us hope so, because the alternative “solutions” out there - “let everyone in and register them all Democrat” on the left ...

And Bush's policy differs from this how?

Most people who pontificate on illegal immigration don't want ordinary people to understand this is not a right vs. left issue, but rather, elites vs. ordinary citizens.

[RFEngineer]

““let everyone in and register them all Democrat” on the left and “ship them all back to Mexico no matter how long they’ve been here or how productive” - are neither workable nor just.”

Shipping them all back to Mexico is most certainly the law. Those on the left, as they nearly always do, take an issue that is truly black and white - that illegal immigrants are illegal under the law - and try to turn it into shades of grey - by invoking some magical god of “justice” that supercedes the laws of this land.

On immigration, you either do it legally or you don’t. It has nothing to do with being just....the rules for compliance are arduous and complicated - but those are the laws. It is “just” to expect compliance. It is “just” to expect consequences borne from lack of compliance.

All politicians, if they serve the constitution and the laws that they make under the constitution should officially say that they expect compliance with laws, even as they seek to change laws that they do not like.

They failed to change the law, therefore illegal immigrants must be sent back to their home country. To do anything else is by definition unjust.

[DesScorp]

She’s wrong on this. You cannot reward lawbreaking in any form, or you’ll just get more of it. 1986 proved that conclusively. “Compromise” on Amnesty is essentially surrender on illegal immigration. We should never give Amnesty to those that thumb their noses at our legal system, and let it be known that no matter how long it takes, ICE is going to find you and deport you.

We want immigrants here. But play by the rules and get in line like everyone else.

[okie01]

"...the illegal immigration extremists."

This is a classic "moderate" vs "extremist" argument.

The "moderates" are being "reasonable". The "extremists" are asking for too much.

However, this illegal immigration argument is subject to Barry Goldwater's famous tautology: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

Why? Because the stakes are so high. As in the survival of the rule of law and the American culture...

[EDINVA]

” ...they’ve managed to give the back of their hand to what every year becomes a more substantial portion of the electorate, ... “

How do Illegal Aliens become part of the electorate?