Posted on 02/16/2008 1:49:07 PM PST by Witch-king of Angmar
I just got back from the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in Washington, D.C., where conservatives began lining up behind a man who’s been sticking it to us for years. By a process of self-hypnosis, many have managed to convince themselves that McCain is actually one of us.
Not for nothing did Benjamin Disraeli call conservatives the stupid party.
What part of John McCain do we not get? McCain-Kennedy, McCain-Feingold, McCain-Lieberman, McCain-Edwards -- among other socialist, anti-speech, open-borders, enviro-Marxist measures he’s co-sponsored with the hardcore left of the Democratic Party over the years.
If Il Duce had served with him in the United States Senate, there would be McCain-Mussolini.
(Excerpt) Read more at donfeder.com ...
Thanks!
Dang.
OK, so we need to not only sweep all open GOP seats, but pick up strong gains in both sides of Congress as well. But we’re willing to concede the single seat in the Oval Office.
I guess the idea is like spotting the other team 3 touchdowns but figuring you can make it up in fieldgoals...
I've voted straight Republican every election I can remember since Reagan.
Thank you for posting that.
susie
not the bills...but the fact he can say and prove he reaches across the aisle. The Rats can’t.
It’s the best strategy we have right now. I have serious doubts that McCain could win even if we all voted for him. We need to go to Plan B. We must never give up the fight.
OK. And the plan put forth by the President (and supported by McCain) had amnesty how?
Yes, we must never give up the fight. Which is why I refuse to cede the office to the Democrats. I will take an 82% (or 75%, if you want to talk the last 8 years) ACU rated candidate over an 8% ACU candidate any day.
Do you really feel that McCain is as bad as the Democrats? That he really holds views in line with the 2004 Democrat platform, not the 2004 GOP platform?
AMNESTY IS FOREVER.
The Comprehensive Immigration Reform (CIR) bill [S. 2611] that passed in the Senate in 2006 with the support of Presidential candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and John McCain contained provisions that would have legalized the status of the overwhelming majority of the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens in this country, i.e., amnesty, and provided them with a path to citizenship. The House never voted on the bill and it died.
Undaunted, in 2007 Senators McCain and Kennedy together with a small group of other senators circumvented the normal committee debate process and introduced directly into the Senate for a vote another CIR bill [S. 1348] that actually expanded the number of illegal aliens who would be rewarded with amnesty beyond the 2006 bill. They would be allowed to stay and work here after meeting certain conditions, e.g., pay fines, learn to speak English, understand American civics, etc., that mirrored similar provisions contained in the 1986 amnesty bill. And, as was the case in 1986, the illegal aliens would be offered a path to citizenship. The major difference is that President Reagan called the 1986 bill what it was, a one-time amnesty. The proponents of the proposed 2007 McCain-Kennedy CIR bill denied, and continue to deny, that their bill is amnesty.
The American people were not fooled by the Orwellian use of language to disguise what was being proposed. Despite strong-arm tactics to limit debate and amendments and to force a hurried vote, the 2007 CIR bill was defeated procedurally due to an unprecedented [and huge] public outcry that clearly had an effect on senators’ votes. The American people have spoken, but Presidential candidates Clinton, Obama, and McCain still call for legalizing the status of most of the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens, i.e., amnesty, which would be an unmitigated disaster for this country.
The irrevocable decision to legalize the status of the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens would have direct and immediate consequences on the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who will be authorized entry as a result of this change of status. Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation estimated that the 2006 CIR bill would have resulted in an additional 66 million legal immigrants over the next 20 years due to existing chain migration policies that allow legal permanent residents to sponsor family members for entry as part of family reunification. And the figure of 66 million is based on the conservative Census Bureau estimate of 11.9 million illegal aliens, and does not include the current annual intake of over a million legal immigrants. The numbers are staggering.
In analyzing the 2007 CIR bill, Rector stated, “The main fiscal impact of S. 1348 will occur through two mechanisms: (1) the grant of amnesty, with accompanying access to Social Security, Medicare and welfare benefits, to 12 million illegal immigrants who are overwhelmingly low skilled; and (2) a dramatic increase in chain immigration, which will also be predominantly low skilled.”
“The bottom line is that high school dropouts are extremely expensive to U.S. taxpayers. It does not matter whether the dropout comes from Ohio, Tennessee, or Mexico. It does matter that the Senate immigration bill would increase the future flow of poorly educated immigrants into the U.S. and grant amnesty and access to government benefits to millions of poorly educated illegal aliens already here. Such legislation would inevitably impose huge costs on U.S. taxpayers.” Heritage research has concluded that the cost of amnesty alone will be $2.6 trillion once the amnesty recipients reach retirement age.
In 1986 the U.S. Government estimated that one million people would apply for amnesty. The number turned out to be 2.7 million. If the current number of illegal aliens is closer to the 2005 Bear-Stearns report estimate of 20 million, the demographic and economic impact of amnesty will be exponentially greater than that estimated for an illegal alien population of 12 million. Without having reliable data on how many illegal aliens are in the country, it would be totally irresponsible to pass legislation that would grant legal status to untold millions regardless of the numbers. It is not the way to make good public policy.
President Reagan’s Attorney General, Ed Meese, stated, “The lesson from the 1986 experience is that such an amnesty did not solve the problem. There was extensive document fraud, and the number of people applying for amnesty far exceeded projections. And there was a failure of political will to enforce new laws against employers. After a brief slowdown, illegal immigration returned to high levels and continued unabated, forming the nucleus of today’s large population of illegal aliens. So here we are, 20 years later, having much the same debate and being offered much the same deal.”
Amnesty has a corrosive effect on the rule of law and is grossly unfair to the millions who have followed the rules and are waiting their turn overseas to enter legally. What kind of message does amnesty send to them and the many millions more who would like to enter the United States? Rewarding those who have entered our country illegally and broken our laws in multiple ways, e.g., ID theft, tax evasion, misuse of social security numbers, etc., will just encourage more people to enter our country illegally so they can take advantage of the next amnesty.
In addition to the huge costs associated with amnesty, there are national security concerns. An amnesty will make it easier for alien terrorists to operate in the United States by allowing them to fraudulently create “secure” IDs with ease. We would be conferring blanket legal status to millions of unknown and unknowable persons, thereby facilitating the movement and access of terrorists who entered the country illegally.
With a stroke of a pen, the legalization of the status of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens— plus the tens of millions more who will join them later legally—will have a profound and disastrous impact on this country. The efforts of state and local governments to control and limit the costs associated with illegal immigration would be undone overnight. And the burden on the taxpayer will increase dramatically. Amnesty is not an action that can be taken lightly or be reversed. Amnesty is forever.
THE TRUTH ABOUT AMNESTY
Definition: Amnesty, from the same Greek root as “amnesia,” forgives past crimes and removes them from the record for future purposes. In the context of immigration, amnesty is commonly defined as granting legal status to a group of individuals unlawfully present in a country. It overlooks the alien’s illegal entry and ongoing illegal presence and creates a new legal status that allows the recipient to live and work in the country.
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986: The textbook example of amnesty. The 1986 law’s path to citizenship was not automatic. The legislation stipulated several requirements to receive amnesty, including payment of application fees, acquisition of English-language skills, understanding of American civics, a medical exam, and registration for military service. Individuals convicted of a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible. No one disputes that this act provided amnesty.
The Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 [aka McCain-Kennedy CIR bill]: This bill resembles the 1986 amnesty in several important ways. Like that law, it would grant amnesty to individuals unlawfully present in the United States. Its provisions prove that its effect would be “amnesty, “ which its proponents deny. Specifically,
· Only illegal aliens are eligible. Creates a new “Z” visa exclusively for illegal aliens, granting legal status to those who have willfully violated U.S. laws and denying that benefit to law-abiding aliens who have played by the rules. (Section 601(c)(1))
· Legal status is immediate. Section 1(a) allows probationary Z visas to be issued immediately after enactment. These probationary visas are nearly as good as non-probationary Z visas, giving the alien lawful status, protection from deportation, authorization to work, and the ability to exit and reenter the country with advance permission. (Section 601(h)(1))
· Immigration laws are set aside. Before anyone even applies for a probationary Z visa, the legislation would set aside the immigration laws that currently criminalize the presence of illegal aliens. The bill waives compliance with several laws as a condition for eligibility for the amnesty, including those concerning illegal entry, failure to appear for a removal proceeding, fraud in obtaining documentation to enter the United States, falsely claiming citizenship, violating terms of a student visa, failure to obtain valid immigration documents, unlawful presence for more than one year, and reentry after having been ordered removed. (Section 601(d)(2)(A))
· Eligibility leads to permanent residence. Probationary Z visas could be valid for years, depending on when the government begins issuing non-probationary Z visas (Section 601(h)(4)). The Z visa can be renewed every four years indefinitely (Section 601(k)(2)).
· Amnesty is unlimited. The bill grants legal status to virtually all of the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens who are in the country today, and there is no cap on the total number of illegal aliens who could receive Z visa status.
Impact of Amnesty: In analyzing the 2007 CIR bill, Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation stated, “The main fiscal impact…will occur through two mechanisms: (1) the grant of amnesty, with accompanying access to Social Security, Medicare and welfare benefits, to 12 million illegal immigrants who are overwhelmingly low skilled; and (2) a dramatic increase in chain immigration, which will also be predominantly low skilled.”
“The bottom line is that high school dropouts are extremely expensive to U.S. taxpayers. It does not matter whether the dropout comes from Ohio, Tennessee, or Mexico. It does matter that the Senate immigration bill would increase the future flow of poorly educated immigrants into the U.S. and grant amnesty and access to government benefits to millions of poorly educated illegal aliens already here. Such legislation would inevitably impose huge costs on U.S. taxpayers.” Heritage research has concluded that the cost of amnesty alone will be $2.6 trillion. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who will join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, will approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens.
The Alternative to a Blanket Amnesty: The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from experiences in Georgia, Colorado, and Arizona. Specifically, we need to:
· Secure the borders. You cannot deal with those already here illegally without cutting off the endless supply of those wanting to enter illegally. Until the borders are secured, it is absurd to discuss additional guest worker programs and amnesty.
· Fully implement the US-Visit Program. There are over 4,000,000 aliens now in illegal status, i.e., people who entered legally as tourists or students or temporary workers but did not leave when their visa expired. We need a system that tracks who enters and leaves the country and deport those who overstay their visas.
· Enforce existing laws against employers. Jobs are the magnets that attract illegal aliens. The government’s failure to enforce existing laws against employers and to create a proper employee verification program must end.
· Implement 287[g] nationwide. The federal government must provide state and local law enforcement with the training and access to databases to coordinate and leverage existing assets to identify and deport illegal aliens.
· State and local laws to discourage illegal settlement. Eliminate sanctuary cities.
In the 1986 amnesty legislation, we tried amnesty without enforcement. It’s time to try enforcement without amnesty.
Democrats are so excited about Obama they are not going to vote for McCain, period. It’s a fantasy to imagine otherwise.
susie
..... How dare you pronounce judgment.....
Wow....looks like I got you attention.
I don’t have the power you suggest but hope I make you worry and stay awake at night.
I act from very selfish reasons. I fear a liberal democrat.
There is presently no alternative.
Kabar,
Nice cut and paste. However, it doesn’t change the fact that the 2004 GOP platform called for a means to allow those here already illegally have a means to convert to legal immigrants, which is what the President’s plan did. The plan was for registration, penalties, and “back of the line” status in terms of citizenship. Not an amnesty like in 1986 by President Reagan.
And you are on record as voting for that same platform and its candidates. Yet now you have a problem with it...
So I have to conclude one of three things:
1. You have flip-flopped on your position on the GOP
2. You were ignorant of what you were voting to support in 2004
3. You are simply throwing a tantrum because your favored candidate didn’t win
So which is it? Because the facts appear to be pretty solid. Immigration reform - “amnesty” as you call it - was part of the 2000 and 2004 GOP platforms AND was spearheaded not by John McCain but by the GOP standard-bearer, President George W. Bush.
You are also on record as stating that you supported those platforms by voting for the Republican ticket, including the Presidential candidate who was pledged to upholding the platform.
So logically, it’s one of the 3 above. Protestations notwithstanding.
Sigh.
What I really feel is sad. Very sad. It pains me to speak ill of John McCain. When I think of the torture he went through as a POW, it makes me want to cry. I can’t imagine having to endure that & not knowing if you will make it out alive. But it grieves me to say that I think his ordeal took something out of him - I think he fights demons to this day because of it. He deserves our respect & admiration for his sacrifice to our country - but - he is not a well man, I do not think. I have tears in my eyes writing this - I have no doubt that this man loves his country......but I’m afraid he is damaged.
In the last few years, he seems to be unwinding. I am afraid of what he would do as our President. I am sorry to say that, but there it is.
Take your chances with a moderate conservative, or accept a hard-core liberal. That's what it boils down to...
I'll take the moderate conservative and work over the next 4 years to get a stronger candidate ready. The alternative is 4 years of unbridled liberalism and socialism unleashed on this nation, and it'll take more than a term or two to recover...
See my post #192. Anything that legalizes the status of those who entered here illegally and permits then to stay and work here is amnesty. Moreover, once their status is legalized, they can sponsor tens of millions more to join them thru chain migration, i.e., family reunification. Rector put that figure of at least 66 million and that is based on an illegal alien population of 12 million. At a minimum, you are talking about an additional 78 million new legal residents of this country if anything like McCain-Kennedy passes. It will not only destroy the country, it will also guarantee that the GOP will be the permanent minority party.
President Obama IS the Second Coming....
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.