Posted on 05/13/2006 4:15:58 PM PDT by LSUfan
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has urged Washington to toughen border security, said Friday that he had misgivings about mobilizing state National Guard troops to help secure the nation's Southern boundary. "Going the direction of the National Guard, I think, is maybe not the right way to go," Schwarzenegger told reporters after a news conference on the state budget.
As part of a proposed overhaul of the nation's immigration laws, President George W. Bush is considering plans to shore up the border by using National Guard troops paid for by the federal government.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailynews.com ...
The guy's a political weathervane. And not even an accurate one.
LOL
He really should have kept quiet until AFTER President Bush addresses the nation on Monday evening.
Am I the only person who is sick and tired of Schwarzenegger?
ABSOLUTELY NOT, he doesn't even run Kalifornia well
I am beginning to think much of this has been scripted in advance!
Schwarzenegger has said he favors a temporary-worker program but provided few details about how such a plan should work. He does not support blanket amnesty but also thinks it is impractical to consider deporting millions of illegal immigrants.
So in other words, he is both pro and anti illegal immigration.
Long term, the answer is a triple-redundant fence and better Border Patrol coverage. And a few prosecutions of employers would get people's attention.
Short term, get the Guard into the areas Border Patrol has trouble covering. Do it now, and don't make any excuses about it.
If Swarz won't do the job without whining about it, I'll be darned if I'm going to pull the lever for him. I know all about "lesser of evil" voting but Swarz is pushing my buttons a little too often.
QUESTION: President Vicente Fox is in Austria today and he will be in Sacramento in the next couple of weeks. The Senators in Washington D.C. have brokered a deal to rewrite the comprehensive immigration reform. Will you take a leading role in calling or influencing any of those decisions in Washington D.C. next week?SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, I'm not part of that decision making, but I do put always pressure on the federal government. And I've said it over and over in my op-ed pieces and also when I did interviews or when I speak about the subject, that we must push the federal government to come to a solution and to really create reform and part of the reform has to be securing our borders.
Now, there's all kinds of talk about now - should we use the National Guard and all of those kind of dialogue. I think that the key thing is that we secure our borders. Going the direction of the National Guard I think is maybe not the right way to go because I think that the Bush administration and the federal government should put up the money to create the kind of protection that the federal government is responsible to provide, not to use our National Guard, soldiers that are coming back from Iraq, for instance, and that have spent a year-and-a-half over their and now they are coming back. I think that we should let them go work, back to work again. I think that what we should do is press the federal government that it's their responsibility, not the State's responsibility. So, to provide security and to protect the people of California and of America. That is the key thing.
And then we have go and start working on what do we do with the people that are here and how do we really have a really reformed system. And I will talk to President Fox about that. And I am very happy that he is Austria because maybe he is learning a little bit about my background, that's maybe why he went there, so when he comes over here he can talk to me and maybe bring back some Schnapps from Austria. But, let me just tell you, the key thing is that we create a situation where people from here can hire people if they can't find the workforce here in California or in America they should be able to go outside the country and I think this is what this is all about.
I voted for McClintock.
I wish I had my vote back.
*crickets*
He always does this. He did the same thing right before Bush was going to the G8 summit to try to block some 'climate change' stuff. Arnold came out the week before and wrote an op-ed for a British Newspaper.
I got the impression that his main issue with them securing the border was the money. Who was going to foot the bill?
I'll bet if California, just California, withdrew all benefits being paid to illegals....medicaid, prescriptions, food stamps, housing assistance, SSI, cash, and a whole host of other programs for low income families....there would be enough money to build a DOUBLE WALL.
Arnold has learned how to be a classic politician in a short period of time. First, in order to ingratiate himself with conservatives (and a surprising number of moderates) he criticizes Bush for not supporting tough enough border security. But, now that it appears Bush is listening to his base (thank you Tony) Arnold is attempting to distance himself from the president in order to ingratiate himself with liberals and Bush haters. He has been a great disappointment to many conservatives.
LOL!
I don't like Arnold and did not vote for him but, I don't blame him for being skeptical.
Read the Goode Amendment. It makes the National Guard buddies for the Border Patrol. They will have NO authority for anything, a support role only.
That is not my idea of troops on the border.
Nope.
I'm beginning to think he's "our" Barbara Streisand - a movie star who also know about... nothing else.
While the rest of us were studying, he was in the gym.
Nope.
I'm beginning to think he's "our" Barbara Streisand - a movie star who also knows about... nothing else.
While the rest of us were studying, he was in the gym.
Hey there! Nice to see ya around these parts.
You've been missed!
I hope all is well. :-)
Sovereignty is a federal issue and should be the responsibility of our federal government. The National Guard should NOT be mobilized to secure our boarder with Mexico or collect illegal aliens in the interior. At least three federal agencies (DOD,DHS and USMS) are available to do the job.
There is a place for a guest worker program but the US should be selective, the program should be by contract, and enrollment should NOT lead to US citizenship. The US should accept Mexican males only, 18 to 45 years old, in good health and without a criminal record. Their transportation, lodging, food and medical care should be the responsibility of their host employer. Payment should be through a voucher system sponsored by a Mexican bank. 120 days should be the maximun in-country stay without recycling through the embarkation port in Mexico.
I agree with Arnold and I am not a fan of his.
We need border guards now. His point is that guys who have spent 1 and a half years away from home in Iraq, don't need to be on our border now. In general, it's ok to do it. But it would be very unfair to these folks, unless you used extremely southern california based units. Guardsmen from Sacramento just doing a year in Iraq shouldn't be put on the border unless all other options are gone.
That is the point he was making, and I agree with it. National Guard is for emergencies and wars. We are going to need a permanent presence on the border. That is not the job of the National Guard. These are citizen soldiers. We can offer them civilian jobs on the border, but forcing thrice deployed citizen soldiers to stay away from their family some more, is not just. They deserve a parade, a pat on the back, and some time with their families, and to try to get back to their jobs.
The Gov is right to question the sending of his State NG off on orders of Washington.
Nope.
I'm beginning to think he's "our" Barbara Streisand - a movie star who also knows about... nothing else.
While the rest of us were studying, he was in the gym.
Bush is damned if he puts troops on the Border & Damned if he doesn't put troops on the Borders!
Arnold is talking out of both sides of his mouth. He is just trying to get reelected.
Bill Richardson of New Mexico is speaking against putting troops on the borders!
These guys only care about themselves and the security of the USA!
Gov. Gray Davis has a better pla. Shut down the power to California and Hollywood will lose its glitter and the Mexicans will have no reason to cross the border.
That's a fine point, but it's a strawman. Not all of our National Guard folks are being sent to Iraq. Those that aren't should be assigned to the border.
from the Goode Amendment
`(d) Conditions of Use- (1) Whenever a member who is assigned under subsection (a) to assist the Bureau of Border Security or the United States Customs Service is performing duties at a border location pursuant to the assignment, a civilian law enforcement officer from the agency concerned shall accompany the member.
`(2) Nothing in this section shall be construed to--
`(A) authorize a member assigned under subsection (a) to conduct a search, seizure, or other similar law enforcement activity or to make an arrest; and
Are they Border Patrol buddies or there to do a job. Doesn't look to me like they will be allowed to do much under this.
Arnold = Davis with an Austrian accent.
They are essentially members of the Minuteman Project on federal pay.
The notion that once an alien secures entry across our boarders, that same alien somehow, magically, becomes subject to our civil code is foolish. Unlawful aliens are just that, unlawful trespassers. As such, they should be treated as agents of a foreign government, subject to marshal law and only protected by international conventions. If they resist detention they shall be classified as foreign combatants and if armed during such acts, classified as armed combatants subject to summary action.
I would like to vote for Arnie but right now it dose not look the right way to go.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1631826/posts
What we can do! 7/4/06
Thanks for posting the transcript. It paints a better picture than the sound-bite that has everyone exercised.
Ahhhnold is correct: the NG, being a State entity, is at best a stopgap tool. Ultimately, border protection is a Federal responsibility... a concept which I'm sure is foreign to the D.C. mindset, but maybe even the Beltway folks are waking up to it now.
Your right, he should've done it on his own already.
The problem with Arnold.....he's married to a Kennedy
and the Kennedy liberalism has infected him.
Ok, then, let's deploy the National Guard in New Mexico, Arizona and Texas. When the illegals start pouring into California at rates several times larger than they do now, maybe then Schwarzenegger will change his song!
Thank you, thank you, thank you.....
He is right on border control being a federal government responsibility. But so are the activities in Iraq, where many of the CNG has been assigned to help. I think that his main issue with using the CNG is who picks up the tab. If one listens to the video, one will hear a slight emphasis on the phrase "put up the money".
I also disagree with Arnold regarding "earned citizenship." From listening to past statements, he believes that all those people here in the U.S. should be given the opportunity to become citizens. (See quotes here) I don't. The people marching in the streets making demands do not deserve citizenship and should be punished for violations of immigration laws, not rewarded. If we need 'guest workers' then modify the quotas under existing Visa provisions; if we need more permanent citizens, then increase the quotas for immigrating (I'm don't know to what extent we actually need either).
In the meantime, there are things that Arnold could do to deter the flow of aliens over the border. For example, he could start by using his veto pen and punish local governments who refuse to enforce the law (e.g. Los Angeles Special Order 40). Or, he could take a strong stance on drivers licenses for illegals and just say "NO", instead of dancing with Gil Cedillo and saying that he'll approve them once the federal guidelines are available. Yesterday, he said he had no idea why the California prison population had surged requiring spending increases of more than 60% in the past two years. The answer is obvious and has been published by the GAO and others. He's been flip-flopping around periodically on the debate but has not yet offered what he thinks a comprehensive solution might be nor has he initiated any actions himself. That is disappointing as it is costing California taxpayers about $10 billion a year.
Aunold wants to re reelected. Nuf said.
Amen!!!! He sounds like a Rat you and I hear on Air Amerika, no answers!!!
I never have liked, or more importantly, TRUSTED him---and with his wife a member of the Kennedy Clan....bah!
"I would like to vote for Arnie but right now it dose not look the right way to go."
===
Oh, really? You really want Angelides or Westly as the next governor of CA?
====
Name-dropping: In the first 10 minutes, Angelides replayed the list of his endorsements -- Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, the California Democratic Party, etc., etc. -- over and over. Hey, this was "Decision: 2006,'' not "Pimp My Ride.''
-- What's to disagree on? Westly and Angelides were twins on the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill (yes), fully funding education (yes), affordable housing (of course), health care (yes), same-sex marriage (yes), and signing a bill to give driver's licenses to illegal immigrants (yes). Hard to distinguish oneself that way.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/05/12/BAGEGIQPL21.DTL
=====
WESTLY:
In the “Stand” spot, Westly says, “I’m Steve Westly – before I ask for your vote, I owe it to you to tell you where I stand. I’m strongly pro-choice and I believe protecting our environment is fundamental. As governor, I’ll make education my top priority.” Then the announcer adds, “Steve Westly. Require big corporations to provide adequate health insurance, expand the Healthy Families Program, incentives for hybrid vehicles and solar energy, stop any new offshore drilling.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1627880/posts
=====
ANGELIDES:
Angelides calls himself a champion of "progressive values." As state treasurer, he has pushed public pension funds to dump tobacco stocks, invest in urban renewal projects and pressure corporations into cleaning up the environment. A close ally of labor, he also supports abortion rights, gay marriage, gun control and driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.
If he makes it into a general-election race, his call for increasing taxes could pose problems; Schwarzenegger has been steadfast in opposing higher taxes.
http://www.calcoast.org/news/cpr0060122.html
=====
In the meantime, Arnold:
"They're focused on the Capitol's perpetual war between business and the big four Democratic Party subfactions: labor unions, personal injury lawyers, environmentalists and consumer protection advocates.
The past two years have been bleak ones for the Big 4 because Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has aligned himself with the California Chamber of Commerce and other business groups, rejecting nearly all of the measures they had dubbed "job killers." Schwarzenegger and business, moreover, bulldozed the Legislature into approving an overhaul of worker's compensation that authorities say is reducing employers' costs by $15 billion a year. It was the most significant advance either side had made in the war in many years and one that Democrats and their allies now want to undo. "
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1627876/posts
Arnold is right.
Using National Guard in support role to the Border Patrol accomplishes nothing, and it's an insult to our trained National Guard, who should be utilized to fight the war on terror. Do you object to using contractors in support role to the Border Patrol?
Read the comments on this thread:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1631485/posts
Agreed. What's more it could put the Guard (or even the active military, for that matter) in a bad light when the inevitable "accidents" (e.g. hispanic US citizens mistakenly get "detained", or worse) occur. More BP agents, yes; military on the border, not yet.
Very few people have been calling for troops on the border. A wall has been asked for - not troops.
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.