Time does not permit me to elaborate how frustrating the DC/MSM spin on this has been. We know of several people who have gone through years of government bungling in order to legally emigrate to the US (including a woman who married an American overseas and become the stepmother of his children -- she was widowed when he died and wanted to return to the US to care for his children along with their grandmother, but was forced to go back to college by US Immigration to get additional degrees to be allowed to stay). Another case is that of a student who has been charged late fees for continuing residency applications that were sent in (and arrived) 2 months early but that the immigration people didn't bother to review until after the deadline had passed.
The sad part is that in both cases it might have been easier and cheaper to simply sneak across the border with Mexico and wait to be awarded amnesty...
Bump.
This time it's different"?....we REALLY mean it now?....
Find your senator, Mine are in the scummicrat yes column.
VOTING FOR THE BILL
Akaka (D); Baucus (D); Bayh (D); Bennett (R); Biden (D); Bingaman (D); Boxer (D); Brownback (R); Cantwell (D); Carper (D); Chafee (R); Clinton (D); Coleman (R); Collins (R); Conrad (D); Craig (R); Dayton (D); DeWine (R); Dodd (D); Domenici (R); Durbin (D); Feingold (D); Feinstein (D); Frist (R); Graham (R); Gregg (R); Hagel (R); Harkin (D); Inouye (D); Jeffords (I); Johnson (D); Kennedy (D); Kerry (D); Kohl (D); Landrieu (D); Lautenberg (D); Leahy (D); Levin (D); Lieberman (D); Lincoln (D); Lugar (R); Martinez (R); McCain (R); McConnell (R); Menendez (D); Mikulski (D); Murkowski (R); Murray (D); Nelson (D, Fla.); Obama (D); Pryor (D); Reed (D); Reid (D); Sarbanes (D); Schumer (D); Smith (R); Snowe (R); Specter (R); Stevens (R); Voinovich (R); Warner (R); Wyden (D)
VOTING AGAINST THE BILL
Alexander (R); Allard (R); Allen (R); Bond (R); Bunning (R); Burns (R); Burr (R); Byrd (D); Chambliss (R); Coburn (R); Cochran (R); Cornyn (R); Crapo (R); DeMint (R); Dole (R); Dorgan (D); Ensign (R); Enzi (R); Grassley (R); Hatch (R); Hutchison (R); Inhofe (R); Isakson (R); Kyl (R); Lott (R); Nelson (D, Neb.); Roberts (R); Santorum (R); Sessions (R); Shelby (R); Stabenow (D); Sununu (R); Talent (R); Thomas (R); Thune (R); Vitter (R)
NOT VOTING
Rockefeller (D); Salazar (D)
..Rush Limbaugh's comments concerning Republican anger was not hyperbole...
Ann Coulter article...
No, nobody's listening. This from Michelle Malkin's blog regarding the treasonous "immigration reform" bill the Senate passed with Bush's urging yesterday:
Senator Cornyn gave Lou Dobbs a statement saying the last-minute Amendment SA 41[8]8 says Mexico must be consulted before any fence is constructed.
Anybody here think that Mexico will let a fence---let alone a wall---be constructed on our southern border?
Remind congress that they too are a part of the temporary guest worker program. We can vote them out and we will vote them out if they continue to ignore the people.
Nobody in congress should be safe if they vote for the free pass to lawbreakers Senate Version.
There are good people waiting to run for office against those established puppets of the kill America conspiracy.
They just need citizens money and support.
We should ask them at every opportunity whether it was a mistake or a deliberate act of defiance of the people who elected them.
agreed, i know people following the law within the iNS system and it is amazing how long even the most basic paperwork takes.
The worst part is the new law may provide no amnesty or waiver of various process/requirements to those currently legally part of the multi-year processing backlog at INS (conditional permanent residents, etc.), while giving eventual permanent legal residence to illegals who never complied. this is rather perverse at best.
Does anyone know if the senate version did in fact address the people currently in the system waiting?
In 1994 we cleaned out a lot of the old liberals.
In 2006, 2008, and 2010, we will clean out the RINOs and more liberals.
All you Denny Hasterts, Bill Frists, Harry Reids, and William Jeffersons before. We are going to hunt you down, publicize your failings, and either kick your butts outta town or put you in prison.
Conservatives, let's roll up our sleeves and get to work.
Certainly a difference of opinion here at FR as to what/who the "Base" really is...
Washington listen??? Shoot my cat listens more attentively!
Re: Washington the old question comes to mind 'were you lying then or are you lying now?' The concept of trust is earned and s/b cherished. Washington stopped earning my 'trust' a long time ago. Recent developments have only confirmed my previous beliefs.
ping
Slowly but steadily, we won people over. By the late 60's, we had an emerging GOP majority in national elections. Nixon's Watergate gave us Carter by a hair, but Reagan corrected that with gusto four years later. We continued to win the intellectual battles, as socialism failed in place after place, and the US economy showed that capitalism works best. Clinton was the exception that proved the rule, a minority president who won only by siphoning off the populist voters with Perot and only because he pretended to be a centrist AND only because the new conservative majority was so pissed at Bush because he clearly was not a conservative.
But the pain of a Clinton victory was softened because it helped the American people decide it was finally time to jettison the Dem congress that had prevented Republicans from doing much in office to actually change the leftist/socialist mixed economy that was erected unconstitutionally in the 30s under FDR. Now, we had the Congress, and with W's election in 2000, we might actually be able to accomplish things.
Well, Bush has done very little to advance the conservative agenda. His best efforts in that regard are his Supreme Court picks, which (other than the Miers fiasco) were fantastic. But on government spending, bureaucracy, immigration and a host of other things, Bush is indistinguishable from Clinton. Name one executive order of Clinton's that Bush reversed on his own, from the Utah land grab to the "wall" between justice and the FBI. He left Clinton's people in State, CIA, Justice, the Pentagon.
The war on terror has been listless at best. He should have gone into Iraq one year earlier, as Steyn has written, and as I was saying at the time, not just with hindsight. He should have been more forceful with Syria, instead of letting them attack us from the rear. He should have been actively arming Iranian freedom fighters in the hills of the north since 2002, and fomenting rebellion there, which even if unsuccessful, would tie up those mullahs so they couldn't be causing trouble in Iraq. He should be more active in Waziristan, and if it means venturing into Pakistan once in a while in hot pursuit of AQ, so be it. Stuff it Mushareff. And as a security issue, the border is a joke.
But is is as a cultural and political issue that the border is most threatening to Americans. Suppose that the numbers are right, that there are 12 million illegals in the US right now. If legalized, those people are going to be Democrat voters for at least 3 generations, based on simple demographics. There are enough of them now to sway elections in states that are getting closer, such as Arizona, Nevada, Colorado. They will swell Rat voter rolls in Rat states like California, New Mexico, and as far away as Pennsylvania, Ohio and Louisiana. Even in GOP states, like Texas, they will cause loss of house seats in Districts that are close.
However, what is far worse is that those 12 million will be 30 million within a scant 10 or 20 years, as relatives of legal citizens and the children of legal citizens come pouring across the border. That, my friends, will swamp the GOP and send it to minority status for 70 years, if not forever, because once the Dems are back in control for good, with modern technology and there own personal propaganda mills, they may never let go of the levers of power again. That GOP (I should say conservative, because the two are not synonomous) century will be cut off at its inception, before it ever got a chance to get off the ground and show what it could do for this country.
To maintain the majority that we have worked so hard for, to restore constitutional government, and reduce the size and scope of government, we have to build on the current slim majority, which is approximately 51/49, into a permanent 55/45 or higher majority. Demographic trends, excluding Mexicans, are with us--a wealthier nation, growing suburbs, more educated populace. The FDR socialists are dying off, and the battle is now between the hippie/baby boom/marxist radicals and the free marketeers who revere Reagan. The radicals are not able to sustain the intellectual argument--among Americans. But they can convince 90 percent of the Mexicans to vote with them. And that will change the equation completely.
Bush thinks that he can coopt their votes by being nice to them. But he can't, no more than the fact that the GOP supported civil rights more than the Dems in the 60s led to black support of the GOP. Dems pushed welfare, and blacks voted for Dems, and that is what poor uneducated laborers from Central America will do.
Maybe Bush thinks he needs to be nice to keep the support of current hispanic citizens, but it's not true. About 47 percent of hispanics voted for Prop 187 in California. They are threatened by a new wave of immigration from even poorer hispanics, and so long as our policies are anti-immigrant, not anti-hispanic, the hispanic citizens will not decrease their support substantially from the 40 percent or so that currently vote GOP. Most of those are Cuban anyway.
I get so angry about this because Bush is pissing away the efforts of millions of conservatives over many years, including Jim Robinson right here, to convince Americans that conservatism is the best philosophy of government, if he lets this happen. We can't let him do it--it will take another Harriet Miers times 10.
Official Announcement: The government today announced that it is changing its emblem from an Eagle to a CONDOM because it more accurately reflects the government's political stance. A condom allows for inflation, halts production, destroys the next generation, protects a bunch of pricks, and gives you a sense of security while you're actually being screwed!
Damn, it just doesn't get more accurate than that!