Posted on 05/16/2006 5:39:20 AM PDT by LowCountryJoe
[snip]During the same campaign, circa December 1979, the Gipper responded to criticism from conservative columnist Holmes Alexander with the following: "Please believe me when I tell you the idea of a North American accord has been mine for many, many years. I have seen presidents, both Democrat and Republican, approach our neighbors with pre-concocted plans in which their only input is to vote 'yes.'
"Some months before I declared, I asked for a meeting and crossed the border to meet with the president of Mexico. I did not go with a plan. I went, as I said in my announcement address, to ask him his ideas -- how we could make the border something other than a locale for a nine-foot fence." So much for those conservatives who think the Gipper would have endorsed a 2,000-mile Tom Tancredo-Pat Buchanan wall.
[snip]In his signing statement, Reagan declared that "We have consistently supported a legalization program which is both generous to the alien and fair to the countless thousands of people throughout the world who seek legally to come to America. The legalization provisions in this act will go far to improve the lives of a class of individuals who now must hide in the shadows, without access to many of the benefits of a free and open society. Very soon many of these men and women will be able to step into the sunlight and, ultimately, if they choose, they may become Americans."
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
What has taken him the better part of 6 years to confront this?
2. He said they will actively work on making the border more secure, including more resources and the national guard.
Again, what is with the 6 year delay?
3. He said there would not be citizenship offered to those already here,
He confuses citizenship with Amnesty. The lesser option of being made a U.S. National clearly IS being offered, and clearly is Amnesty. The President confuses giving Citizenship to Amnesty. No, anything which pardons, or grants clemency for the criminal acts of the perpetrators is definitionally Amnesty. He is promoting just that, and trying to mis-define Amnesty to try to avoid the political reprecussions of his disengenuous position.
he also said they would have to be monitored and sign up, and then return.
And if they don't sign up? [Suspecting they won't be allowed to return] He's said it's "impossible" to deport them. So long as he makes no truly serious effort to stanch the border hemmhoraging and deport the illegals in the country...he won't have much credibility with the illegals this bone is aimed at either. He needs a lot more stick, and less carrot.
He touts a non-serious castrated enforcement effort, where the National Guard doesn't even engage in law enforcement, then he makes the continued demand for an abdication of current law, issuing Amnesty via the linking of any enforcement effort to creation of a Guest Worker permits program. Shamnesty.
I remember it well.
You do know that Bush's selection by Ron was regretted by him...but it was the lesser evil at the time. Richard Allen had only suggested Bush...because the alternative bruited about at the time was Gerald Ford!
And Ford was demanding a defacto "Co-Presidency"! Totally unacceptable.
And to be perfectly fair, with some question about his role in China policy, and possible blindness there...GHWB was a good and loyal vice President. Totally Accepted running on the Reagan Platform. Proved Worthy of his office. He was just incapable of playing the part of being conservative once he had the Big Chair all to himself with no Reagan to look over his shoulder. His RINO instincts took over. Thousand points of light, etc.
You can imagine we would both be called Reaganrobots around here for supporting him.
I would wear that appellation as a badge of honor.
I do. Well off for now, duty calls.
There are conflicting reports on this, depending on which "numbers" you want to include. For example, how do you put a price on the cost of crime statistics, i.e. a rape or a murder? Do you include the societal costs of the Americans put on the unemployment rolls? There is a huge debate on what costs and benefits to consider.
Nevertheless, even the numbers showing a favorable economic impact must also show that any impact accrues mostly to upper income business owners profiting from their labor, while the burden is borne mostly by lower middle class Americans who's jobs are taken and/or the labor rate for their particular professions is driven downward. As more and more immigrants come, the declining labor rate of more and more blue collar professions drives more and more working class Americans from middle class to poverty. As the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class disappears, our economy begins to mirror that of the country from which these people came. That is the problem - and it is not worth a small net benefit (if there is actually one) in the form of a cheap head of lettuce or increased profits to a few business owners.
"I remember him fighting with the Conservatives in the Party starting with picking Bush as his VP. You can imagine we would both be called Reaganrobots around here for supporting him."
Maybe Raygun Bonzobots?
And not all of them want to come here, that's for sure.
Not all illegals come from Mexico, there is Nicaragua, Honduras, Colombia, Haiti, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Brazil, Peru, etc etc etc...and most that come here have many more kids than average American, so reaching that 220 Million figure is pretty easy.
Does the Wall Street Journal editoral staff believe in any controls whatsoever on the border? From reading all their recent editorials it appears they are against any form of national sovereignty on the borders. I supposed in their analysis a massive increase in US population will drive economic growth and help the stock market.
Yep Reagan talked a good game on all issues he just didn't follow through. He cut taxes the raised taxes, he talked tough and the flees Beirut, he was against gun control and then he endorsed the brady bill, he was against the dept. of education and then left it 3 times larger than he found it. Yeah but Bush actually advances conservative ideals and because he "don't talk purty" he is not 1/10th the man Reagan was. Give me a freaking break.
You are correct! I am a liberal in the classical sense; my tagline says it all. That means that this is one instance where you, restating what what seems to be the obvious, as you many times do, have finally gotten something right. I see that you have cut & pasted yet another entire article in a thread...the underlined portion is interesting. Why not underline the word "humanely" too? Or does that go against your principles on the grounds that love for the neighbor is only applicable if they're a domestic neighbor?
Truthfully, has this really hurt America?
So what do you propose? I doubt anything, other than the impossible. I am waiting.......
Do you have a proposal that would: 1. Pass our congress, meaning it has to be possible. 2. Do what you ask in a way that won't double our current budget. 3. Not make us into a police state.
I have seen very little from you so called anti-immis but anger or bitterness, and that never solved anything.
Have at it, but be specific and be intelligent or I won't respond.
Yes, I do. And I think it will be a positive effect as it always has been.
Hamilton was a big government statist who despised states' rights. I now see where your adoration for him comes into your ideology in this forum.
The minutemen were effective, they will be even moreso because they have government sanction and coordination.
In what way is granting amnesty by any other name effective in deterring more illegals?
Full amnesty is cititzenship. This is not citizenship. They will have to be signed up, or be deported. We will know who they are. They will have to go home at the end of their license. Seems like a great idea, cheap, and effective. Honestly, there is no other idea that is this good, I have never seen one given by an anti-immi this good....actually I have never seen one by them at all that had a snowball's chance in Hell of working.
So, let's give up, right? That way the anit-immis can sit back and be happy. Negative, sour, bitter......... like Grima Wormtongue.
But immigration has been rather extreme, in its sheer volume of nominal numbers, for the last two decades. The middle class during this time period has grown. The median income, at least, has grown as we have become a service economy of specialized knowledge workers. All of this is anecdotal at this point because I have read nothing to back it up. Perhaps you have something to contradict this though?
the president "opposes amnesty" but wants a guest-worker program that will let most of the 12 million illegals in the country gain citizenship.
This is amnesty. On top of that, we get to have a revolving door of unlimited "guest workers".
Guess what? Millions more will be coming in and it will be deja vu all over again, except next time, it'll be 60,000,000 million illegals here instead of the current 30,000,000.
It's the Dems that want citizenship (and Mccain). If he had given a preferred path to citizenship, I would have bailed on him, he didn't.
Please get your facts straight.
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.