Posted on 11/09/2006 2:14:10 AM PST by NapkinUser
President Bush yesterday said he will team up with Democrats to pass an immigration bill with a guest-worker program that his own party blocked this year, and his Republican opponents predicted a bloody intraparty fight but said they cannot stop such a bill from passing.
"We will fight it, we will lose. It will go to the Senate, it will pass. The president will sign it. And it will happen quickly because that's one thing they know they can pass," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican and chairman of the House Immigration Reform Caucus, who had led the opposition to a guest-worker plan. "I am absolutely horrified by this prospect, but I have to face reality."
Mr. Bush supported a bipartisan majority in the Senate this year that passed a broad immigration bill including a new worker program and citizenship rights for millions of illegal aliens. But House Republicans blocked those efforts, calling them an amnesty, and instead forced through a bill to erect nearly 700 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexico border.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Oh joy, another third party. Isn't there one that we could work with, instead of another splinter party? What would you like this new third party to represent?
Knowing some folks here who have dealt with these freeloaders [doing the jobs American's won't do].......you can add that they lie, cheat and steal every chance they get. Add in drug addicts and pushers of same to our children and this country will go down hill faster than you can say hillary.
So, YES they will vote with the dimwits for President. IF "W" does this the preisdency will all be but given to the demonwitch.
The idea that the Reps should get on the bandwagon is poor public policy and a compromise of our principles. Moreover, about 80% of Americans are on our side. The Reps need to do a better job of articulating what is at stake. Illegal immigration is a winning issue for the Reps if we play it right.
So is SS reform. Starting in 2008, the SS "surplus" will start declining, which means that Congress will have to come up with new money to replace the shortfall or cut spending. The Reps should hold the Dems feet to the fire on spending and Pay-go. Let's see what the Dem Congress does with spending and if their actions meet their words in 2006. In 2017, SS starts paying out more than it is taking in. The Reps should use the Dem scare tactics about SS and not OK, like they did in 1983, any increase in the retirement age or an increase in FICA taxes or any attempt at means testing or recomputation of the COLA fromula.
I don't know - they seem to want to blame libertarians for the loss. What did they do to win libertarian votes? Nothing.
Agreed... sort of. What if we had a true conservative candidate who took a stand. Wouldn't the middle states be able to carry him past Cal. and TX?
Imagine what the next Republican candidate is going to have to promise the hispanics in order to carry those states? It's frightening. Pandora's box (of amnesty for illegals) has been opened and Bush will now fully release the evils within.
Because they would have to admit that they were wrong, that Bush was wrong, that the RNC was wrong? Because its easier for them to blame the voters and not the candidates who didn't appeal to enough voters. Because they're mad that they couldn't control the minds, hearts and souls of all voters and make them support their candidates. They don't really want people to think for themselves, they want people to vote lock step, for any candidate that has an R after their name. Which is precisely why we are in this position in the first place. Complacency and lowering our standards. jmo
The House did not follow Bush's lead, otherwise we would have "comprehensive immigration reform." The supporters of the Senate bill like McCain, Kennedy, and yes Bush, are saying that it is not amnesty. Rather, they are making the illegals pay fines and get to the back of the line. Of course, they can continue to stay and work here and be offered a path to citizenship and have their status legalized. Bush would have signed the Senate bill. He will sign the one that comes to his desk from the 110th Congress.
Bbbut, we were assured by so many here that he was just saying those things because he needed to appear moderate to get more votes and get elected. /sarcasm
I keep wondering why folks think the conservatives stayed home. Personally, I think the "undecideds" and "moderates" (i.e. people too stupid to make up their minds before they get to polling place) sank the 'Pubbies.
And the message that sank 'em was "the Culture of Corruption." They voted against the 'Pubbies 'cause they acting too much like, well, Democrats.
If it gets to that point, let them pay off their portion of the national debt and cut them lose. ;)
Seriously, after you lose an election, there is a period where you tend to want to throw the baby out with the bath water. Impeaching Bush would be a disaster for the Repubs, and we should do all in our power to make sure this does not happen. They would probably impeach Cheney as well...Is it Pelosi who would become president in this instance? God help us!
It might take a Million Conservative March on Washington to prevent this.
I am not advocating a third party, but if the WH/GOP supports "comprehensive immigration reform," which includes a pathway to citizenship [amnesty], there will be a significant number of Reps and independents and Dems who will be galvanized by this issue to the point that a third party will be formed on the issue of controlling our borders. The situation is getting worse, not better. The numbers will increase in anticipation of passage of the new law. The Dems will also slow down the funding for the construction of new fencing, which will probably not happen. According to polls, the vast majority of Americans do not want to increase immigration and want our borders controlled.
I agree with you. People tend to believe that most people agree with them. But I do not believe there are enough true conservatives to win national elections. We need to woo moderates, independents.
The vast majority of Americans will sit on their buts and complain. When you have two parties who's leaders agree on immigration reform, what can you do?
We lost big in the middle states. What makes you think a conservative can carry the middle states?
"What a great message to stab in the back the congress that blocked bush's amnesty."
This goes back to what Rush has been saying. House pubs did stop the passage of shamnesty last spring/summer. BUT they never campaigned on it - didn't clearly explain to the majority of voters (not on FR) who don't understand that both houses have to agree or it's then hammered out in committee.
Also most voters don't pay that much attention until Labor Day and don't decide until the last couple of weeks.
They over estimated the voters awareness of their standing against the president on an issue that the American people care about.
p.s.
One of my sons is named James Richard.
I agree. I know I didn't stay home. I voted for candidates that opposed illegal immigration, opposed open borders, opposed abortion, opposed bigger government, opposed higher taxes.
The President is a Republican, he can veto this and nothing will happen, but he will not.
The Republican Party is history and your method of blaming everyone except the Republican Part is gone also.
The fact that your Party lost is the fault of people that put on blinders and refuse to see the truth.
Sure, keep dumping on Conservatives and we will have no other choice than to take our votes elsewhere or sit it out.
If President Bush continues to push this agenda, expect to see more losses.
I am an Independent Conservative and I did not stay home and, yes, I voted straight Republican.
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.