Posted on 03/08/2002 1:24:33 PM PST by sarcasm
Friday, March 08, 2002 - WASHINGTON - Rep. Tom Tancredo takes credit for thwarting the Bush administration's last effort to offer partial amnesty to thousands of illegal residents, but Thursday the outspoken immigration foe said he may have been outmaneuvered by the White House.
President Bush has struck a deal with the House leadership to place legislation that offers an extension of amnesty on its consent calendar before Bush heads to Mexico for a state visit next week, the Colorado Republican said. That action should ensure quick House passage of legislation that Bush has repeatedly sought from Congress. It would allow an undocumented person to receive legal standing, such as a valid green card, by filing a declaration with the Immigration and Naturalization Service. It presumably also would require the person to have been in the United States by a certain date and have filed a declaration with the INS from an appropriate sponsor, such as a relative or employer, and pay a $1,000 penalty. "The terms are still up in the air," said Dan Stein, executive director of the Federation for American Immigration, a group that has been allied with Tancredo. "We've heard to the effect that the president wants something to bring down to Mexico." The initial Bush proposal, designed exclusively for Mexicans, once was high on the president's legislative wish list, but it was delayed after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11. However, as the president noted Wednesday in a speech to the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, he now is pushing for the extension of the amnesty program known by the section of immigration law that covers it, Section 245I. The president hailed it as a way to reunite family, separated by the border. "If you believe in family values, if you understand the worth of family and the importance of family, let's get 245I out of the United States Congress and give me a chance to sign it," Bush told the chamber members. Tancredo, the head of a congressional caucus on immigration issues and proponent of halting virtually all immigration, said he had blocked a previous attempt by Bush to push an extension of the amnesty program through the House. But this time, he said House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., had agreed to place the issue on the suspension, or consent, calendar, making it difficult to defeat the proposal. The Senate might be more favorable to the bill than the House, expanding the numbers of individuals who can apply, Tancredo said.
He don't get it, and no matter how many times we show it to him, he still won't get it.I think the best thing everyone on this thread should do is completely ignore him and Dane. That's my plan. You can't debate with a bozo.
True enough, but sometimes it is hard to resist the impulse; like slowing down to rubberneck a car crash. It's just fun to watch someone make a fool out of himself repeatedly, and still not get it.
Watching Danevogado try to logically reason his way through an argument is like watching a very large, very slow moving train wreck.
After 9/11 I thought for sure things would change - people would start being concerned about immigration, government officials would start closing our borders, the news would cover this as a major crises ect...
None of that happened, no one blamed 9/11 on our immigration policies, FOX News, Rush, O'Reilly they all disappointed me.
So I like you will vote with immigration as a litmus test but unfortunately the masses wont even consider it.
Congress' power to admit aliens under whatever conditions it lays down is exclusive of state regulation. The States ''can neither add to nor take from the conditions lawfully imposed by Congress upon admission, naturalization and residence of aliens in the United States or the several states. State laws which impose discriminatory burdens upon the entrance or residence of aliens . . . conflict with this constitutionally derived federal power to regulate immigration, and have accordingly been held invalid.'' (Takahashi v. Fish & Game Commission, 334 U.S. 410, 419 (1948); De Canas v. Bica, 424 U.S. 351, 358 n. 6 (1976); Toll v. Moreno, 458 U.S. 1, 12 -13 (1982). See also Hines v. Davidowitz, 312 U.S. 52, 66 (1941); Graham v. Richardson, 403 U.S. 365, 376 -380 (1971).)
He was a Corporal (active duty) in 1st Bn, 8th Mar. and he was Adid's son. We both served together in 1/8 at the same time. He was in a different Company, and we never met, but I heard that when we got to Somalia, he was not allowed to go ashore.
I also heard he just took over as some type of head honcho in Somalia.
I remember a comedy from the 80s called "Born in East LA". The central character was a vato from Eas'Los who got deported in a roundup. He didn't speak Spanish, only that pidgin gang slang and so he went to work for an American in Mexico who was helping wetbacks get across. One of his job assignments was to train some non-Mexicans to act like vatos from his barrio because they didn't speak Spanish or English. I think that deal about ME's and others coming in via Mexico has been going on for a long, long time.
A lot of toilets can be cleaned with that kind of money.
FYI This was Indian land not yours and even if it had been, someone would have pissed it away long ago. It is people like you that make people like me want the borders SEALED and send you all back to where you come from.
Go ahead and gloat. Just remember Americans wont go down without a fight.
Keep talking. I love it when belligerent, semi-literate radicals tell us what they are going to do to America.
You are right though - beer, potato chips, and the couch appear to be the order of the day for now.
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.