Byrd to delay Senate vote

Washington Times ^ | Tuesday, March 19, 2002 | By Stephen Dinan

[WRhine]

He wanted it even more than the Dems. Remember the speech he recently gave to a group of Hispanic businessman, talking about Mexico, it was mentioned on the big Tancredo thread? He wants this very much.

Correcto Mundo.

[Sabertooth]

Oh, I get it now. You two probably never voted for Bush in the first place, so it's fruitless to even talk with you in any sensible way.

Wrong, I voted for both George W. Bush and his father. I even protested for Bush during the Florida fiasco.

Sabertooth..you read innocentbystander's post, figure it out. I'm not going to sit here and scroll down through the posts for you.

I've read the entire thread. Given IB's premise, to which you subscribe, no one's answered my question...

If Latinos flock to the GOP because the Democrats voted against Amnesty...

What will the RINOs have to give them to stay?

Seriously, I desire enlightment. Shine me the brilliance.

[MissAmericanPie]

I can't stand Byrd, but have to give credit to the cagey old bird. He, at least, wets his fingers and checks which way the wind is blowing when it is critical for failing Democrats to come up with an issue fast.

Now legislation we badly need has this poison pill 245i attached to it.

[Sabertooth]

It's been posted 1,000 times in the last week and we all know your position. They came here legally, then the INS screwed up their paperwork. Therefore, working or returning home became a violation of their status.

Flat out not true. I've posted the legislation.

Section 245(i) extensions apply to Illegals.

Why do you suppose there's a $1,000 dollar fine, if this is just about legal foreign nationals who are the innocent victims of INS snafus? They don't deserve to be fined, do they?

[RickyJ]

Who’s being the kid?

You believe Bush when he says something then does the exact opposite. Yet you still believe him?

You sound like a kid who sees mommy and daddy put the presents under the tree yet still believes in Santa Clause.

Even most kids are smart enough to figure it out though, so what's your problem?

[Hostage]

No, not masterful. Vast majority of Americans want this illegal border crossing to stop. Byrd just trumped the GOP and indeed has an issue that Americans will support to the hilt. If Bush doesn't get with the people on this and quick, he will end up with 80% approval for his handling terrorism and not much else, except a democrat congress in his 2nd half.

[Mo1]

I haven't "given up" mol, I love America as you do. Part of fighting the fight is holding accountable even those politicians who we think are our allies.

Well I am glad to hear that and don't get me wrong I have no problems in questioning Bush on issues .. but what I have been seeing around these threads .. Many are not questioning first .. instead jumping ship before all the facts are out.

I am not saying that you are part of this .. it's just a general statment

We have almost 300 million American's in this country and some folks around here want Bush to do what they want NOW .. regardless of the outcome

If folks want to have President Hillary Clinton in 2004 .. a good way to do is for Bush to come in and start throwing his weight around .. I don't know about other folks but the 8 yr nightmare of the Clinton's was enough for me

It may be hard .. but baby steps are needed to get things fixed .. Give the people taste of what really works and they will end up wanting more...

[Bogey78O]

Oh no, I understand it. I'm just amazed at this new "ally" we have.

[Hostage]

If what you say is the case, then why doesn't W get before the WH press and make the case?

W's already on record that he's against amnesty and for a worker program, that's double-speak! He's got corporate pressure on him as he said that if there businesses that need the work and there are workers wanting to work, then he thinks it's good idea to get them together.

He needs to get a clue and throw down the gauntlet!

[MissAmericanPie]

Yeah, it's just brilliant how Bush just handed Byrd the means to pull all the swing voters, one issue voters, and those thinking of dropping their Demoncrat party registration right into the Demoncrat camp.

[linn37]

hehe are we having fun yet?

[EBUCK]

Pretty amazing how some here still say there are conditions that have to be met.

What your post #156 (and 245(i)for that matter) says in essence is that for the applicant to be accepted he/she must meet these conditions, but by no means do these conditions preclude an applicant from being accepted.

EBUCK

[over3Owithabrain]

I appreciate your even-handedness, but I think your premise is a little flawed. For the most part, people aren't getting a "taste of what really works" in the domestic agenda, excepting tax cuts, which I will gladly admit is good. What we're getting is a slightly smaller taste of Democrat-style liberalism. So that's what people will want more of - increases in education, loosening of immigration laws, CFR, etc. The general direction Bush is going is leftward, towards bigger government. It isn't that Bush is compromising a little but still trending rightward so that people will move that way with him. I fear it's the opposite - he gives his right wing base a bone or two (like 300 bucks back), but is steadily moving us the wrong way, albeit a little slower than the Dems would like. My view is he should use the amazing amount of goodwill and political capital he currently has to truly lead domestically like he has in the war. It appears to me he actually does envision a bigger, but perhaps more "compassionate" and trustworthy government. I'd rather not entrust compassion to Washington DC, I'll handle that myself. Compromise is necessary of course, it can't be all or nothing. But honestly, IMO, having a modest tax cut and no estate tax is not a sufficient trade-off for the other domestic proposals Bush is holding hands with the Democrats on. BTW, I understand you not wanting the Clintons back. But we can't live our lives doing everything in fear of their return. The fact is, they were already defeated in a sense in 2000 when Bush narrowly defeated Gore. Moving forward with a honest, strong conservative agenda doesn't guarantee defeat in the future, unless you're conceding the only way to beat them is to be just a little less liberal than they are. also, Hillary can run in 2008 too, so should we keep caving until then too? See where that philosophy leads, there's always another election around the corner. I don't want to win elections but lose the fight for smaller government and more freedom.

[GLOBILL]

Yeah, you are right. When you see your neighbor getting hungry, you don't invite them in your house and live with you, tell you what to do, collect welfare, and keep having babies that the taxpayers are supporting.

[100%FEDUP]

IMHO, W is just pulling the hidden ball trick. The house passed this imigration bill which is now in the Senate, now the RATS are complaining about the amnesty clause. W's just sucking them into the fold so he can say later on, "You guys fought amnesty for mexicans so I guess you wouldn't mind going along with us on other homeland security matters!"

[Angelique]

You could not be more correct. Byrd is nothing more than a gasbag; unfortunately, so is Lott.

[Annie1]

Bush has lost a significant amount of his base supporters, like me, because he is a f-up! He will not swing any Hispanic vote because most Hispanics, who vote, are democrats--- and the repubs are aware of this fact; and they know that the conservative Hispanics, mostly cubans, and their supporters are very very much against Amnesty... in Miami, the cubans are trying to push other Hispanics out... and the Repubs know all of this, and are now trying to garner more black support; because more and more blacks are finally seeing the failure of the Demos.... but, the biggest problem for Repubs... is the lost of it base supporters..... and the sway that Demos might get from this. This is how I see it....

[truthkeeper]

I agree with Bobby Big Byrd on this one...and yes, those ARE pigs flying outside my window.

[WRhine]

ROTFLOL. That pic of yours tells the whole story!

[Geezerette]

You're right! If that is the case, Bush is cutting it too close. Sort of like signing the Campaign Finance "Reform" bill, assuming that it will be shot down in the courts (Supreme Court?). What if it isn't shot down? What if the "amnesty" bill does end up passing? They miscalculated, to our detriment.

g