Posted on 03/30/2006 2:31:49 PM PST by Irontank
Imagine that you and several thousand of your closest friends decided to sneak into Mexico illegally. And imagine you then gathered in one of the largest cities, waving American flags and blocking traffic. Imagine you demanded in English that the Mexicans change their laws to accommodate you.
....
Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado is engaging in what amounts to open warfare with the White House on the issue. His aide Will Adams told me yesterday that Tancredo and other House conservatives intend to block any bill that contains either amnesty or guest worker provisions.
....Bush always has had ample authority to solve a relatively manageable problem with illegal immigration.
"I'm not sure what about this guy is conservative anymore," says Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "He appointed a couple good judges and that was it -- and he almost blew one of those chances."
Krikorian was alluding to the Harriet Miers fiasco, one of a tri fecta of Bush blunders that have alerted conservatives to his true nature. The second was the Dubai ports controversy. The third is this push for immigration amnesty.
Krikorian advises Bush to cut his losses and accept a tough enforcement bill. Once that 700-mile fence is up on the southern border, Bush might revive his push for that amnesty that he re fuses to call an amnesty.
"A lot of ordinary Americans might swallow it if it were presented as a second step after enforcement was in place and if it weren't demanded as a right but as a result of illegals begging the forgiveness of the American people," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nj.com ...
I also stopped giving about a year ago. It at least feels like I'm doing something.
College Po-Sci professorships are largely populated by liberals and the enemies of conservatism. I'm sure you weren't trying to reinforce my points, but you managed anyways.
Do you want to go ahead and list the institution and the name of the professor, as well? That would be helpful in deciding the validity of the work you mention.
I checked out the book's basic premise. A few problems with your analogy:
1) The causes of illegal immigration, state-mandated PC, and globalism are much more along the lines of a mass movement than the disorganized forces trying to stop it.
2) Illegal immigration is the result of the few imposing their will on the many. It is therefore tyranny.
3) Libertarians have served as unwitting aid to every form of tyranny ever foisted upon mankind. They invariably side with the oppressors. France is the embodiment of Libertarianism.
4) The only way to defeat a tyrannical mass movement is with an opposing mass movement. Even the original Patriots had to raise and train an army.
5) As someone who watches TV less than 2.5 hours per week, I am fairly immune to indoctrination. My allegiance to my country, any politician, or any group are subject to periodic review. I do not blindly support anything.
6) I have personally interceded on the behalf several people in the face of a bullying crowd during my lifetime. About half my friends in HS hung out with me because it was the only way they could keep from getting their a$$e$ kicked by JBT's for being 'different'.
7) I was a rabid Libertarian in my younger days. As I have matured, I realize that a strong nation with just laws and intact borders gave me the luxury of making libertine decisions. Government is a necessary evil. Providing for a common defense is really its' only legitimate purpose. Libertarianism is its' own worst enemy. It seeks to create a power vacuum here that will be filled by the influence of foreign governments.
LOL!! Of course not!
I just love reading your posts as they're always good for a laugh, with a truth underneath.
Keep 'em comin'!!
I know how you feel. Next time I voting for Kerry! Or Gore!
We could never pass another bill and the illegal immigration problem could get better if only the executive branch would uphold the law.
Give us a break. We're tired of hearing the "hysterical/irrational" accusation for not toeing the party line. The republicans should be the ones toeing the conservative line. Trying to out liberalize the left isn't a winning strategy.
I support Tancredo because he risked his political career to take a tough stand on a controversial issue in the face of some pretty nasty personal attacks by true racist groups, liberals, and the MSM. He's also caught hell from brown-shirts masquerading in the guise of Bush idolaters.
When he first took his stand, he thought he was committing political suicide, but didn't care. He was just doing a job that no-one else had the fortitude to take on. I can understand how someone from outside Colorado, or who is unfamiliar with his 10-years-long record on this issue and service to his constituents might think him a demogogue. He's not. He's just doing what his constituents have charged him with doing.
I feel an ex-History teacher is more fit to govern than the self-serving lawyers and elites that are typically put into congress. You should really do some investigation of his voting record and biography. Might open your eyes.
Everybody believes in something. Even atheists (they fanatically deny the existence of a god). The key is being able to distinguish blind faith from belief. We comprimised on illegal immigration in 1986. I supported that comprimise. In measured hindsight, I see that was a terrible mistake that does not bear repetition. Comprimise with the enemy inevitably leads to further demands for comprimise. It's slow-motion surrender. Amnesty and the President's idea of a 'guest-worker' program are both appeasement. Appeasement is a failed ideology. It's been disproved for a good long while now.
First, I live in Westminster, 80234.
Question: Do you believe in the Constitution? Do you know its history? Do you remember it is oftened called the "Great Compromise". All or nothing politics aren`t going to work very well in America, never have, never will. (prove me wrong, tell me when they worked and got something done)
As for our friends the lawyers, I`m a hunter and I should have the right to hunt them, and fully support a long season with a very liberal bag limit.
Now, real world time. Lets stop the bleeding first. Lets build the fence, lets double the border patrol, lets let local law turn over illegals that they caught here committing new crimes, lets pass a law that says if you are caught trying to sneak in, you can never come back. All those things could be law before the roster wakes up. Not bad stuff.
To get that, and I`m sure even you have to admit they will really help, we are going to have to deal with those that are already here. There is no way, none, that the illegals that have established themselves are going back. The Courts will never allow that, and many Americans won`t buy it. So, remember whats important, stopping the bleeding, we should be working to get the toughest, realistic, program that will allow these people to stay provided that the in house illegals jump through the right hoops. The thing here is to enforce the law, if that happens, this works.
Finally, guest workers. The must have employment with definate start/stop dates in order to work here. A government approved labor contractor will find jobs for these folks before they can come in. A portion of their earnings will be withheld untill the worker goes home.
I don`t think I got all the answers,but,Trancredo is still stuck on all or nothing, and my money is on nothing.
What puzzles me is how any Prez-Wanna-Bes can support amnesty - especially McCain. They'll be toast in a primary. Are they that frickin' dumb?
Finally a rational voice. I agree with you. Let's build the Wall of America and then we can have everyone accountable in America. I'm not that against Mexicans mowing lawns unless they are felons.
Hear, hear, hear. Immigration is good for America.
I consider immigration threads to be FR's Achille's Heel.
That's fine with me - time is on our side. When the illegals don't get amnesty, they'll get angry - and lose whatever support they had from the American people.
Yes - LEGAL immigration
This is no suprise Bush has always leaned this way. At least he is trying to do something about it. He will not veto a fence only bill. It is up to the Congress, we should lean on them not just focus on it is all the Presidents fault for everything.
That's exactly what HR 4437 is about. The last amnesty punctured our carotid. This one will finish the job of bleeding us dry. All it's going to do is strengthen the resolve of the other 4 billion denizens of craphole 3rd world countries to storm in because they know full well we won't send them back once they get here. If granted the vote, the 20 million illegals here now will see to that.
As a denizen of Westminster, I would think you understand the stakes. Everything in that town south of 104th Ave has pretty well gone to seed. Just because 80234 hasn't been overrun yet doesn't mean it won't be.
I agree that the borders need to be secured, and that we need better enforcement and/or more enforceable laws. A guest-worker provision needs to be kept seperate from that. The attempts by Bush and others to tie a guest worker program to our national security is the central problem. I furthermore believe that any form of amnesty, no matter what it is called will effectively negate any attempt made at stemming illegal immigration.
Might I ask... do you hire verify the immigration status of your employees? I won't call the cops on you. I'm curious why you'd be for securing the borders, but not enforcing the laws that are already on the books, or changing them to be more effective.
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.