DUMPING CONSERVATIVES AT THE BORDER

Laura's Weekly E-Blast ^ | 1/8/2004 | LAURA INGRAHAM

[kellynla]

I am beginning to think John McCain actually won the presidency in 2000.

Conservatives were relieved when the Straight Talk Express petered out during the 2000 primary season. John McCain, although tough on national security and runaway spending, was hardly a conservative on major issues such as campaign finance, healthcare reform and immigration.

Yet this is exactly where we find President Bush today (except unlike McCain, Bush doesn’t seem to have much of a problem with runaway spending). Last year President George Bush signed the McCain-Feingold bill into law, which is one of the worst assaults on political speech this country has ever seen. When conservatives (and many liberals) howled, the President’s advisers whispered that they believed the Supreme Court would “clean up” the more onerous parts of the bill which dictates the types of political ads that can air before a general election or primary contest. Of course the Supreme Court rubber stamped the entire thing and so the result is less, not more political speech in the U.S.

And now President Bush charges across the landscape to rescue us from our “unfair” and “broken” immigration system by rewarding people who came here illegally with the promise of legal status. This proposal essentially mirrors the immigration legislation sponsored by—you got it—Sen. McCain. Under the Bush/McCain plan, anyone outside the U.S. who wants to come into the country would only need to show proof of a “job offer” in order to get an initial three-year work permit that would be renewable for an unspecified period. Such temporary workers could also bring family members here. What prevents these people from staying on beyond their time premitted for "temporary" work? As it stands now, there seems to be no limit on the immigration —temporary or permanent— allowed under this plan. And as for the claim that this would be a big boon to the American economy? Illegal immigration costs taxpayers $20 billion each year, in extra education, healthcare, welfare, and prison costs. Today thirty-four percent of Mexicans legally in the U.S., and 25 percent of Mexicans illegally here are welfare.

How are those costs diminished under the Bush plan?

Most bewildering is the Administration idea that this plan is necessary for homeland security reasons. On the contrary, it would not be surprising if some would-be terrorists are among the millions of illegals who will become “documented” under the Bush plan. As Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) charged, "Guest worker programs and gradual amnesty provide cover for terrorists."

It’s easy to understand why Vicente Fox, McCain, big business, and La Raza are happy this week—but what’s in this new proposal for working class American families? How about those immigrants who a lot of time and money to comply with our immigration laws?

The real answer is absolutely nothing. The only reasonable prediction is that wages for a wide range of jobs will be kept artificially depressed by outside workers—now with “legal status” will work for peanuts. “I have worked construction for 30 years as a truck driver (18-wheeler),” wrote one of my listeners, “And every year my pay has gone down because Mexicans are flooding the trucking industry…."

When Bill Clinton says we live in an “increasingly borderless world,” we’re not surprised. It’s the usual globaloney blather. But when a Republican president advocates a policy that will make our borders effectively meaningless, we should be outraged.

With his approval numbers high, President Bush has made a devil’s bargain with business and Hispanic groups. Elites from both parties are ignoring the view of a strong majority of Americans that we need to stop illegal immigration, not high-five it.

Another listener wonders: “What happened to the ‘party of principle’? More like the party of pandering. Considering the massive numbers involved, this amnesty being floated really is Pandora's Box, once opened cannot be closed.”

President Bush has now done the equivalent of posting a sign at the border: “Help Wanted for $5.15/hour.”

Conservatives are right to be disappointed in President Bush. We are right to ignore the Administration’s promise that this time, non-amnesty amnesty will be good for the American people. Our citizenship and legal residence should be reserved for people who love this country enough that breaking her laws—whether at the border or on the street—is out of the question. The next time I hear from his Administration that it is doing all it can to protect our homeland, secure our borders, and increase our standard of living, I will laugh.

Now I know the definition of “compassionate conservative:” a person who campaigns as a conservative, then sells out key conservative principles.

[FITZ]

Obviously the 25% (I've read other places that say 35%) on welfare programs definitely need to go --- they're not working out so well here. All the ones dealing in felony document fraud need to go --- we don't need that kind ---- but I don't know what percent they would be. Any caught in other crimes like shoplifting, DWI, driving without insurance, failure to pay their hospital bill should be sent back as they are found and convicted.

There might be some still left --- I don't know what percentage but at least it won't be the trouble-makers and welfare bums.

[Burkeman1]

Did Laura Ingraham, known Bushbot, get a new program installed recently? Wow. Pretty strong coming from her. But she is way too late. Time to stow such criticism with election time coming up fast.

I know some are asking us to hang in there for the judges and I can respect that opinion.

There is no question that Bush has betrayed major conservative positions and values. Few on this forum will deny it and most are pretty upset by it. I have to admit that I have never been surprised that Bush has failed to support conservatives or our positions. I never thought he was one to begin with. I had the lowest of expectations for him. I had two expectations from Bush- the first he has delivered on- He is not Clinton and will never dishonor the office with a sickening personal life. And second was the judge issue. If he fails to appoint the most rock solid strict constructionists and not some Souter or Kennedy like "moderate" I am all done with the GOP for good. Third party here I come with money and time.

This is the last chance they have for a lot of conservatives.

[Dane]

And what is Laura's solution, deport 8 million people, the vast majority of those that do a hard days work, such as clean toilets.

Laura, JMO, but the model you are hinting at in deporting people was used once already in recent modern history, and that was by nazi germany.

You can count me out Laura.

[dwilli]

Let's concentrate real hard:Is the most conservative member of the Senate a Democrat from Georgia, the most conservative house member a Democrat from Texas and the most conservative power player at 1600 Penn. Avenue a black, female scholar from California?

[Poohbah]

Enforcing the law, deporting illegals who have been arrested, and restricting welfare will be sufficient enough to encourage many illegals to leave.

We try to do the first two. The problem is that we cannot do ENOUGH such enforcement to actually deter illegal immigration, absent a huge increase in the government payroll and the intrusiveness of law enforcement. Doingg the third will require some form of national ID--and that's another hot-button issue for conservatives.

This is an issue that cuts across multiple areas of conservative thought--enforcing the laws on the books vs. individual liberties vs. limited government spending--and does so in different ways on each major issue.

[Dane]

Enforcing the law, deporting illegals who have been arrested, and restricting welfare will be sufficient enough to encourage many illegals to leave. President Bush, IMHO, has encouraged more to come.

I agree with restricting welfare, but the vast majority aren't on welfare. They are making your beds in the hotel you stay at or cleaning the toilet in the office bathroom.

[SAMWolf]

Now I know the definition of “compassionate conservative:” a person who campaigns as a conservative, then sells out key conservative principles.Bullseye from Laura

[Dane]

And for all those who want a great wall on the border...the one in China didn't stop the Mongols...how will a Mexican wall stop the illegals? (don't forget we have a wide open border to the north!)

The way you stop it is to bring Mexico's economy up to speed. Mexico should be a very rich country, so should Brazil and Argentina. The only non-basket case economy in Latin America is Chile. Of course the left in America will always bemoan the fact that purer than the wind driven snow marxist Allende, was overthrown by that mean old Pinochet who brought prosperity to Chile.

[putupon]

Nail 'em Laura; the ladies rock!

[Kevin Curry]

And what is Laura's solution, deport 8 million people, the vast majority of those that do a hard days work, such as clean toilets.

Yes. Deport them.

And clean your own toilets. You don't need an underclass of social welfare dependant indentured servants to do it for you.

[libertylass]

This country removed the governments of two countries (Afghanistan and Iraq). What makes you think it would be so hard to start a systematic deportation program?

You start with the criminals that we are paying for in jail. Then you work on the street gangs. Then you go lurking through the welfore roles. How about that for starters? It wouldn't hurt to start citing employers who cannot jive their employee rolls with their workers comp. rolls and tax rolls.

And yes.....Walls work!!! During Clinton's watch he approved "Operation Gatekeeper" which worked so well that illegals had to start crossing through Arizona instead of the California border. It was 14 miles long and caused such a shift in the mass movement into this country that pro-immigrants used the old "their dying in the desert" argument to force shame upon American politicians and the border patrol. We need to continue building that wall all the way to Corpus Christie, Texas. It would not be nearly as expensive as trying to maintain some loser database that is just for show anyways.

Bush does not get a second vote from me.

[Burkeman1]

Of course the left in America will always bemoan the fact that purer than the wind driven snow marxist Allende, was overthrown by that mean old Pinochet who brought prosperity to Chile.

If this was a liberal discussion board you would be scolded. It is considered by liberals obligatory when talking about the overthrow of Allende by Pinochet to mention at least once- "CIA assistance"- in the Coup.

[Peace will be here soon]

Third party here I come with money and time.
This is the last chance they have for a lot of conservatives

---

I am with you my friend. Take a gander at this.

---

Immigration

We affirm the integrity of the international borders of the United States and the Constitutional authority and right of the federal government to guard and to protect those borders, including the regulation of the numbers and of the qualifications of immigrants into the country.

Each year some 972,000 legal immigrants and hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens enter the United States. These immigrants — including illegal aliens — have been made eligible for various kinds of public assistance, including housing, education, Social Security, and legal services. This

unconstitutional drain on the federal Treasury is having a severe and adverse impact on our economy, increasing the cost of government at federal, state, and local levels, adding to the tax burden, and stressing the fabric of society. The mass importation of people with low standards of living threatens the wage structure of the American worker and the labor balance in our country.

We favor a moratorium on immigration to the United States, except in individual hardship cases or in other individual special circumstances, until the availability of all federal subsidies and assistance be discontinued.

We also insist that every individual group and/or private agency which requests the admission of an immigrant to the U.S., on whatever basis, be required to commit legally to provide housing and sustenance for such immigrants, bear full responsibility for the economic independence of the immigrants, and post appropriate bonds to seal such covenants.

The Constitution Party demands that the federal government restore immigration policies based on the practice that potential immigrants will be disqualified from admission to the U.S. if, on the grounds of health, criminality, morals, or financial dependence, they would impose an improper burden on the United States, any state, or any citizen of the United States.

We oppose the provision of welfare subsidies and other taxpayer-supported benefits to illegal aliens, and reject the practice of bestowing U.S. citizenship on children born to illegal alien parents while in this country.

We oppose any extension of amnesty to illegal aliens.

We oppose bilingual ballots. We insist that those who wish to take part in the electoral process and governance of this nation be required to read and comprehend basic English as a precondition of citizenship. We support English as the official language for all governmental business by the United States.

[billbears]

but the you are hinting at in deporting people was used once already in recent modern history, and that was by nazi germany.

So now protecting the borders and deporting the criminals that came into this country is now equated with the atrocities carried out in Nazi Germany?

[kellynla]

"but the vast majority aren't on welfare." Sorry to be the one to break the news to you but illegals cost American taxpayers TWENTY BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR! And 34% of legal Mexican and 25% of illegal immigrants are on W E L F A R E! What should we do? Ever heard of the word "D E P O R T A T I O N" ??? With the TWENTY BILLION DOLLARS A YEAR we would save I believe we could afford to deport the illegals and secure the borders don't you??? hmmmmmmm

[putupon]

What do you do with 8 million illegals here now?...............LOGISTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE!!!

No problem

the one in China didn't stop the Mongols

We're a little more technologically advanced tham the Chinese that built the Great Wall.

[libertylass]

Maybe, but I can guarantee you they took those jobs away from other minority citizens.

In 2000 I called the Manager of a Michigan Hilton to give him my support when he was being blasted in the papers for firing 6 illegal aliens working in the Hotel. The Union, of course, came him such grief that I decided to give him a supportive call.

I asked him straight out "did you have trouble filling those positions with citizens?" He kinda chuckled and told me "Oh no. I hired three blacks, a Bosnian and two hispanic citizens. I told him this big lie about Americans not wanting the jobs that illegals take was a crock then, and I believe it's a crock now. They also need to remove the discriminatory practice of NOT hiring only-English speaking people.

[Dane]

So now protecting the borders and deporting the criminals that came into this country is now equated with the atrocities carried out in Nazi Germany?

Not all of them are criminals, unless you equate murder with a person crossing the border for the privlage of cleaning a toilet.

[4.1O dana super trac pak]

Thanks for the input. I wonder how much the government payroll is going to increase running a "bracero" program? Leave them illegal is all I gotta say.

Gotta go.

[Burkeman1]

IT wasn't Nazi Germany who deported the most people. It was the Soviets and their East Europeon puppets. About 10 million Germans were stripped of their property without compensation and forced West. The number who died in transit or from brutality isn't really know to this day. Truman was very cooperative in this endevour and likewise forced hundreds of thousands of Soviet Citizens back to the Soviet Union to a certain Gulag term or just outright execution.

I trust we could deport that many and do it far more justly and humanely.