Posted on 06/02/2006 3:46:47 PM PDT by kellynla
President Bush yesterday rejected House Republicans' stance that illegal aliens must return home, calling it "wrong and unrealistic" and saying many will have to be allowed to stay.
Speaking to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a block from the White House, Mr. Bush also directly challenged businesses to hire only legal workers, and said those that don't should be prepared to face increased fines. In addition, he said both the House and Senate will have to compromise, but said voters expect a bill and he said that bill should tackle both enforcement and a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens.
"The difficulty of this task is no excuse for avoiding it," he said.
Mr. Bush was making his first in-depth comments since the Senate passed its broad immigration bill last week, setting up a showdown over immigration policy with the House, which passed an enforcement bill in December.
Last Friday, and again on Sunday, Rep. F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., Wisconsin Republican and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said he cannot accept any approach that allows illegal aliens to stay in the country with the government's approval.
"The words 'path to citizenship' is a buzzword for amnesty. We ought to be honest -- it is amnesty," Mr. Sensenbrenner, a key House negotiator, said on NBC's "Meet the Press" program. He contends that more enforcement against employers would make it hard for illegal aliens to get jobs, encouraging them to go home. But Mr. Bush dismissed that argument.
"Listen, I appreciate the members are acting on deeply felt principles. I understand that. Yet I also believe that the approach they suggest is wrong and unrealistic," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Wow! That's a lot. You're a real trooper!
But I think you'll have a bigger impact if you write that article I encouaraged you to write earlier. More people will read it. Send it to national review or some other site. Enforcement advocates need to know that the president has plenty of power under existing law, and they don't seem to know it.
It will certainly make many people more comfortable with the position of no bill is better than a bad bill.
Add to that driving without vehicle registration, auto insurance, drivers license, committing crimes and fleeing back across the border to avoid prosecution, low cost housing, low cost education, free medical treatment, food stamps, and fraudulent voting "rights." Oops almost forgot, free or low cost legal services courtesy of the ACLU and various organizations demanding preferential treatment of illegals over citizens.
I lived most of my life in Texas. Most of my family lives in Texas still.
The idea that immigration has made Texas a democratic state is an interesting contention.
In fact, that is quite why I trust George Bush much more than the people posting stuff against him on this thread. Texas has managed immigration much better than California. In fact, I dare say it has done better than any other southwest state. Bush served as a two term governor Texas. He is not ignorant on the topic.
I do not think Texas has been or is being destroyed by immigration. I still think it is one of the strongest states in the union and getting stronger.
The "Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986" aka Simpson-Mazzoli makes it illegal for employers to hire illegals. See Title I.
No, it's being destroyed by transplants from Maine and New England posing as Texans...
Just like the Republican Party is being destroyed by "moderates" posing as conservatives...
And America is being destroyed by globalists posing as Americans...
I recognize that point but here again there is a pretending that Bush suddenly started a program to allow Mexican immigration into the US.
Mexicans have been flooding into the US for decades. In many respects, borderbots are asking for a drastic change in US practices toward Mexico. This is arguably inconsistent with rule of law since the expectations are now disrupted and rules are enforced in a manner different from the past.
Can I see the knife you used to split such a fine hair
Bump to that, fellow Texan!!
I think I might actually agree with you about this point which returns to an earlier comment I made about trading many of our citizens for immigrants. Bush has done a relatively masterful job of preventing hispanics from becoming a democratic lock. He has Texas as a strong case study on this point especially when compared to California.
I do think the border bots are verging on the undoing of this work.
You know the drill.
"Do you want to cut off your nose to spite OUR FACES!!!"
"You conservatives are like spoiled brats!"
"If you can't get your way you're going to pick up your marbles and go home!
"WAHHHHH!"
"Third party, Ross Perot,don't you remember?, etc, etc, etc,"
When the Republican Party gets turned out it will be OUR FAULT!
It looks like the only way we can get the country club, free traitor,
republicrats is to smash them right in the face.
Their noses will be bleeding for the next eight years, but they'd rather "endure"
the democrats than join with the conservatives.
After all they have much more in common with them than they do with the conservatives.
Just for the record.
And thus the merits of the two step. Law enforcement needs to get into the habit of enforcement. Good habits are learned, and the learning comes from repetition.
The Perot objection is really a false canard because he could have won that race had he not dropped out at first (at the time he was ahead in the polls). I think the right person running on this issue could make Presidential history.
Yeah, it is for the record. That's why I typed it on a public forum dopey.
The sad thing is, we're going to end up with a sweeping amnesty for both illegals and their employers, as well as the universal ID. Funny how it always seems to work out to the government's benefit.
One might almost think it were planned that way or something.
Looks like you slipped through.
Yes, but if you it, an employer is off the hook if presented with a fake document that looks "reasonably genuine."
An administration that really wanted to enforce the law could find ways around this, as others have pointed out, but it is obvious that the current one isn't going to do it without a congressional mandate.
"There have been many ideas about what Texas is, what it has become, we are not all in agreement, but I'd like to ask each of you, what it is you value so highly, that you are willing to fight, and possibly die for. We will call that Texas!" -William Travis
One of my favorite quotes from "The Alamo"
Regardless, the US population is growing at a .91% rate, which includes the one million legal immigrants per year and the 500,000 illegals. If we continue to grow at this rate for 20 years, assuming the same rate of immigration, legal and illegal, the current 300 million population of the US will grow to about 360 millon people. This assumes the current mortality rates as well.
Case in point...
Sinkspur: Bump to that, fellow Texan!!
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.