[nj26]

A lot of Washington politicians are motivated by self-interest, rather than our interests.

But that can be exploited. I never hesitate to remind anybody that a third-party, anti-amnesty candidate could derail a Rove-backed, pro-amnesty nominee in 2008, just like Ross Perot derailed George H Bush in 1992. Or that RINOs in conservative districts need to remember that there is a primary. (We came close to getting rid of Specter and Kolbe.)

So, when you call talk radio, write a letter to the editor, or call your representative, never forget to remind them that their job is on the line, if they don't carry out the people's will.

[drt1]

I agree re: The devotion to self/special interest on the part of virtually every Pol. Immigration would appear to be an obvious exception to that generalization in that I cannot identify any supporter that would wield enough power to influence any lawmaker to support the preposterous policy of unrestricted immigration. Unfortunately, the insanity of the proposed approach and the apparent support it has in DC circles flies in the face of that logic. The thirst for the Hispanic vote can't be the only source for it though. I would bet that most "Legal" Hispanics don't want this unrestrained invasion any more than the general population - And why would they. The case could be made that legal immigrants are damaged the most by the entry of illegals. Again, I do not understand the impetus for these policies and I really would like someone to provide some rationale for the current approach - I don't believe there is one.

[bill1952]

Damn good point.

I'm going to follow your lead on that point!

This is one idea that just might add "tipping point" weight if all of FR were to get behind it.