[Mo1]

On principle I agree, but if this was the only bill that they were going to get out of the Senate under the current circumstances then voting it down would have meant no bill at all, which is a defeat for the Republicans and that would be used against them in November. You can argue it's messy, but the only path they could take.

Have you seen ALL that is in that Senate Bill??

I would rather have no Bill then what the Senate passed

As for Frist putting the House Bill alone up for a vote .. he can't because it would be voted down

[kabar]

The Senate bill increases LEGAL immigration threefold and doubles the number of H1B visas for starters. Also, as Sensenbrenner said on Friday, there are two are two groups that receive amnesty in the Senate bill, the illegals and the employers.

[johnny7]

I would rather have no Bill then what the Senate passed

It's a pathetic stance to have to take... but it's what we'll have to hope for if the Senate doesn't accept the House stipulations.

[Phsstpok]

Have you seen ALL that is in that Senate Bill??

No.  I'm going to count on others (particularly here) to dissect it and then validate the things I think are important that get pointed out here. 

I would rather have no Bill then what the Senate passed

Agreed, but if the Senate didn't pass a bill then there would be no chance of a good bill.  If the House negotiators can pull an acceptable bill out of conference then let's go for it, but if they can't be satisfied then kill the whole thing and make an issue of it in November. 

As for Frist putting the House Bill alone up for a vote .. he can't because it would be voted down

Yeah, but it would put all of the Dims and the RINOs in the Senate on record as voting against protecting the border.