Posted on 05/10/2006 10:23:52 PM PDT by Zero Sum
Maybe some recent polls will put some backbone into Senate Republicans. But don't bet the rent money on it.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Heh. Sowell gets a lot of those, doesn't he?
See Post #77.
After that smackdown yesterday where you got caught fudging numbers, I'm surprised you're still posting stats.
One can't escape noticing that you're no longer pointing to the DHS report anymore that didn't support your numbers and was used to discredit your assertions. Now you're posting the same number, but you don't want anyone to follow any links to actually look at the real numbers or they'll see the truth and notice that President Bush has been absolutely malfeasant in enforcing immigration laws. But all that have to do is go to Post #77 and see the numbers for themselves.
You know, you're like the Energizer Bunny with your incessant propaganda on behalf of illegal aliens and their criminal employers.
See Post #77.
After that smackdown yesterday where you got caught fudging numbers, I'm surprised you're still posting stats.
One can't escape noticing that you're no longer pointing to the DHS report anymore that didn't support your numbers and was used to discredit your assertions. Now you're posting the same number, but you don't want anyone to follow any links to actually look at the real numbers or they'll see the truth and notice that President Bush has been absolutely malfeasant in enforcing immigration laws. But all that have to do is go to Post #77 and see the numbers for themselves.
You know, you're like the Energizer Bunny with your incessant propaganda on behalf of illegal aliens and their criminal employers.
Maybe some recent polls will put some backbone into Senate Republicans. But don't bet the rent money on it.
The percentages vary a little from poll to poll, as is usually the case, but these polls agree on one thing — the public's top priority on the immigration issues is controlling the borders. They prefer the tougher bill passed by the House of Representatives to the weaker approach of the Senate.
The House of Representatives bill has been depicted in much of the media as harsh or draconian, as if it is a terrible thing to make illegal entry into this country a crime. The House bill is what is supposed to have sparked massive protest demonstrations around the country by illegal aliens and their supporters.
Those demonstrations may have impressed the media and intimidated politicians but they didn't change many minds among the American people. A majority of Republicans, Democrats, and independents all favor the tougher House bill. The percentages differed among these groups but they were all majorities.
What is really striking is that 53 percent of Hispanics supported the House bill. The loudmouths at the demonstrations did not speak for all Hispanics.
On this issue, as on some others, the Democrats in Congress are more united than the Republicans, even though the Republicans have a majority in both Houses. But a united minority can often defeat a divided majority.
As things stand at the moment on the immigration issue, the Democrats clearly have the upper hand politically as this year's elections approach.
The Democrats can solidify their base behind amnesty. But the Republicans' base — 81 percent of whom are behind the tougher House bill — are undermined, if not demoralized, by the vacillation of the Senate Republicans and the Bush administration on strong border control, apparently out of fear of alienating Hispanic voters.
In view of the latest polls, it is not clear how many Hispanic voters are going to be alienated. The greater danger is that the Congressional Republicans will alienate their own supporters.
The irony in all this is that the Republicans could turn the tables on the Democrats and put them on the defensive, instead of being on the defensive themselves.
There is no reason other than politics why amnesty and border control have to be in the same bill. It will take time to see how various new border control methods work out in practice and there is no reason to rush ahead to deal with the people already illegally in this country before the facts are in on how well the borders have been secured.
Separate border control legislation would force the Democrats to stand up and be counted on this issue, without the political cover of a package deal. Some of the more weak-kneed Republicans also want this political cover but taking away the package deal would do far more damage to the Democrats.
Legislation dealing solely — and seriously — with border control might be difficult for some Congressional Republicans to vote for but it would be a political nightmare for the Democrats in Congress. And a bill takes just 51 votes to pass in the Senate.
Unfortunately, President Bush has pushed the package deal and used the straw man argument that we cannot find and deport millions of people, even though virtually no one has said that we could.
The real question is whether sweeping the illegal alien problem under the rug by calling them legal will bring in still more millions of illegals, as a previous amnesty has already done. Nor will calling amnesty by some other name do anything more than undermine the confidence of the American people in general and the Republican base in particular.
Sometimes caution is the most dangerous policy. General MacArthur once defined defensive warfare in one word: "Defeat."
Frankly, the Republicans deserve to lose this fall's election, after their wild spending and pandering to economic ignorance on gas prices. But a Republican defeat would only bring in the Democrats — and the country does not deserve anything that disastrous. The Democrats' petty obstruction and irresponsible demagoguery in wartime disqualifies them for national leadership when a nuclear Iran and nuclear terrorists loom on the horizon.
Of course those stats leave out the conversion over to Homeland Security, increased forgery, the concentration on terrorist rich targets like ports and power plants. It also leaves out 2005 when the rate went back up to 1125 or 2006 which had already eclipsed 2005 by April of this year.
Selective reporting is not good for the left and it's not good for the right either.
How many so far this year? I've been reading stories about roundups, but haven't seen a grand total.
No selective reporting. These are the only DHS stats I can find online. If you have more recent stats then I would love to see them. It may soften the numbers a bit, but the overall malfeasance will still be evident I suspect.
As for the conversion to DHS, they themselves don't differentiate on their own report and therefore I didn't. And, to me, it makes no difference. The raw numbers are the raw numbers.
Welcome to democracy. Nobody gets everything they want all the time. Every vote is a choice between the lesser of two evils.
"Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."
-- Sir Winston Churchill
Congress provided in the Civil Rights Act of 1866 declaring persons born in the US who are subject to a foreign power are deemed to be non-citizens of the United States. That means children of immigrants---anchor babies---and any other individuals born here---who are running around carrying Mexican flags, and following the orders of the Mexican government, are not considered US citizens under the 1866 US Civil Rights law.
Here's the deal: The protestors--carrying Mexican flags---and the Mexican government share the same goals: legalize Mexican illegal aliens and keep the borders open. The Mexican government sees this as a way to relieve economic pressure on their government to reform the economy. Mexico's leaders also work to retain the loyalty of the immigrant mobs so that, even if our laws allow them to become American citizens, they retain their loyalty to Mexico, and are subjects of the Mexican government.
This outrageous plan is being discussed thanks to the dupes in the US Congress.
In the Mexican Congress, it was recently announced that a document would be drafted, to show support for the protest marches in our country. The Mexican government published advertisements in leading American newspapers calling for the legalization of illegal immigrants (those in the United States, not in Mexico) and "a far-reaching guest workers scheme." Not only that, said the ads, but "in order for a US guest workers program to be viable, Mexico should participate in its design, management, supervision and evaluation."
In other words, the Mexican government wants veto power over U.S. immigration policy. Outrageously, many in our own government are assuming the Hyphenate-Fellate position and are only too happy to oblige, as long as there's votes and campaign contributions to be had.
Ruben Aguilar, spokesman for President Vicente Fox, made this statement to support the marches: "The recent protests carried out in different places in the United States are indicative of the imminent necessity of a migratory accord that corresponds to the interests of both countries, and that especially to the defense of the rights of migrants. The government of the (Mexican) Republic ratifies its commitment to the Mexicans who live in the United States and its intention to work in the defense of their rights ..."
That's what you think, senor.
Congress must act to deny citizenship to any American who is subject to, and who is following the orders of, a foreign government. We might even consider some kind of legal sanctions against Mexico.....for instance the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations of 1963 prohibits a foreign country from interferring in the foreign policy of a sovereign nation.
Thanks for the excellent post. Not an impressive record by this administration.
Sowell nails it again!
Except that we don't live in a Democracy. We live in a Constitutional Republic. The Constitution is supposed to be upheld ALWAYS. It is not negotiable, it is not fungible, it is not simply a set of guidelines. I don't see either party upholding the Constitution and protecting the rights it binds them to protect when they hold office. The Constitution is the metric by which to measure how well an officeholder or a political party is doing. Not how much power a party gets or holds. Not how much pork an officeholder brings home for his district. Not how much fundraising a party or candidate can do. Not how many votes a candidate gets in re-election. Not who holds the majority, the chairman slots, etc. The true measure is if they are upholding the Constitution and fulfilling the contract between the limited government it established and the people who possess inalienable rights granted by their Creator. Both parties are deeply wanting in this regard.
A 95% reduction in the annual average of worksite arrests under President Bush.
Your post, unfortunately, is a gross understatement.
bump
Yup. That would appear to be a detectable decrease.
Very useful set of stats. So much for the quisling claims that Bush has been making significant progress in cracking down on illegal aliens.
I assume you've had all of those stats math checked and verified by clawrence 3...[ducking and running for cover]...
lol...is the shoe flying your direction, czar? : )
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.