Posted on 06/06/2006 3:25:33 PM PDT by new yorker 77
CARLSBAD -- Republicans seized on Democrat Francine Busby's comments that sounded like encouragement for illegal aliens to help her campaign as the GOP sought an edge in the final hours of a surprisingly close House race.
Immigration looms large in the runoff election Tuesday in the San Diego-area district some 30 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border. Busby's remarks, and her subsequent explanation that she misspoke, has drawn much of the attention in the race's last days.
Speaking to a largely Hispanic audience last Thursday, Busby faced a Spanish-speaking questioner who said he wanted to help her campaign but lacked voting papers. The question was translated into English and she responded, "Everybody can help. You can all help. You don't need papers for voting, you don't need to be a registered voter to help."
Busby's GOP rival, Brian Bilbray, criticized the Democrat, saying she was encouraging possible illegal immigrants to volunteer for the campaign. On Monday, the GOP launched a radio ad that said, "That's right. Francine Busby says you don't need papers to vote."
Busby said repeatedly throughout the weekend that she misspoke. She said she had been trying to encourage underage high school students or people who weren't registered -- but are in the country legally -- to participate in the political process.
"I had a slip of the tongue and I corrected it immediately," Busby said. "I want to make it unequivocal that I do not support anyone who is here illegally voting or working on campaigns."
In the traditional GOP stronghold, registered Republicans outnumber Democrats, 3-to-2. But the downfall of convicted former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, doing time for accepting bribes, has given Democrats hope of capturing the seat.
The winner of Tuesday's runoff will serve the remaining seven months of Cunningham's term. The prevailing party will play up the outcome as an early barometer of the November midterm elections.
Reflecting the high stakes, the two parties have spent more than $6 million combined on the contest. President Bush and first lady Laura Bush recorded automated telephone messages for Bilbray. A mass e-mailing from Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., the party's 2004 presidential nominee, was sent last week to more than 100,000 supporters urging them to help get out the vote. Early voting began this weekend at county registrars' offices, with several hundred casting ballots. Busby and Bilbray voted on Monday.
Busby, a local school board member, has focused her campaign on an anti-corruption theme and assailed Bilbray, a former congressman, for his time working as a lobbyist. On immigration, she backs the Senate-passed bill that combines enhanced border security with a guest worker program and a shot at citizenship for many of the 11 million illegal immigrants in the country.
Bilbray, who highlights his congressional experience, favors construction of a fence "from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico," and barring "illegal aliens from any access to Social Security benefits."
On his Web Site, he offers no plan for treatment of the illegal immigrants currently in the country.
A fractious Republican Party base and the presence of a third candidate are the wild cards in the race.
Some conservatives consider Bilbray too liberal on social issues and even on immigration. The ultraconservative San Diego Minutemen have endorsed William Griffith, an American Independent on the runoff ballot who won less than 1 percent in the April special election that led to the runoff.
Griffith has spent only a few thousand dollars on his campaign, but last week got a boost from Busby's campaign, which ran ads on conservative talk stations encouraging listeners concerned about immigration to vote for Griffith.
Bilbray also faces a primary challenge from self-financed candidate Bill Hauf, who backs Bilbray in the runoff but has recently spent more than $100,000 on radio ads running to his right for the Republican berth in November's election.
"The Republican Party is splitting 14 ways from Sunday on border issues, along with fiscal issues and social issues," said Carl Luna, a political scientist at Mesa College. "The real conservatives may just take their jacks and go home."
Republicans seized on Democrat Francine Busby's comments that sounded like encouragement for illegal aliens to help her campaign as the GOP sought an edge in the final hours of a surprisingly close House race.
Papers? You don need no steenking papers.
Bush's speeach today sounded like an encouragement to millions of Mexicans to enter the US illegally to get amnesty in the coming months.
The dims see this as a bellweather race. If Busby wins, they feel this is a sign the dims will soon take over. I really hope she's trounced, even though I don't believe they will take over, win or lose.
"Griffith has spent only a few thousand dollars on his campaign, but last week got a boost from Busby's campaign, which ran ads on conservative talk stations encouraging listeners concerned about immigration to vote for Griffith."
For those of you that haven't heard the Busby pro Griffith ads, they are very good.
Let's hope her pro Griffith ads don't persuade many amateur conservatives.
I hate to say this...but I've seen some of the most under-handed, vicious tactics used by people who have run for school boards. It doesn't surprise me that she was playing dirty pool.... not to mention the illegality of it all.
Where do you people come up with this stuff? It's like you hear what you want to hear now. Oh, and on that point about $100k fines for employers, are you going to move to a rural community to pick fruit and lettuce or go clean hotel room toilets, or just be content to see the agricultural and hospitality sectors collapse from a lack of workforce and to see the US become an importer of food so we can have volatile food prices similar to volatile gas prices? You want to pay $5 for a head of lettuce and have your food supplies subject to the whims, and possible food cartels of foreigners? Think! Don't feel. That's what liberals do.
I predict this goes Bilbray 50%, Busby 46%, not getting up much beyond the 44% she got in the primary and 2% for Griffith.
Anyone who allows a pro-amnesty LIB to get into this seat by wasting there vote for an unelectable no-name is a useless nitwit who's opinion is worthless.
Whoops, 4% for Griffith I meant.
"Think! Don't feel"
You first.
I am thinking. That's why I realize the economy does need a certain number of guest workers...even if you don't like the color of their skin. Or are you dying to move to the Central Valley to work the fields?
"Think! Don't feel"
You first.
You might see some Democrat protest votes for the third guy.
Anyway, I would rather pay 10 dolars for lettuce(actually it has very little nutrition), than to leave my children living in a lawless latin american 'paradise', including bars in doors and windows.
Play now, pay later; and the ones paying will most likely be our children and grand children. If you have none, and plan to have none, enjoy your cheap lettuce.
And don't call me racist nor ignorant about this danger; I came from latin America, and I am 100% against the illegal invasion of this great nation.
"The Economy" will do just fine.
The government estimates that illegals have between 15-20% of the jobs in the food service and housekeeping industries.
Similar or smaller % in other areas. That means that AMERICANS are willing to do the other 80-85% of those jobs.
Americans will innovate when labor goes away. The cotton gin is one not very good example. Tomatoes got too expensive to pick by hand to they modified the shape, making them slightly oblong,so that they could be picked by machine. Illegal aliens are not guest workers. Guest workers are guest workers and Illegal aliens are criminals. It really isn't any harder than that.
I hope you're right.
Brian must win.
I'm hearing that turnout is low. The Dems thought that high turnout in their primaries would be good for Busby. Apparently negative campaigning turned them off -- even Kos, according to NRO.
The question is, (1) which side is more turned off, and (2) whose GOTV machine is running today. If somebody drove Francine's illegals to the polls, it's game over.
If she wins, it will be interesting to see how many votes the Dems were able to steer to the strawman candidate. That will be a lesson on immigration for both parties -- we can count on the Republicans being too obtuse to pick it up. With any luck, so will the Democrats be.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
An ignorant or even deceitful question. We DO NOT need 12 to 20 million people(who hate our flag, language, culture, etc), working in the fields; much less the tens of millions more they want to bring in for the next 30 years.
They are working everywhere with false papers taking jobs from Americans. Are some people blind or just plain stupid? Or are you going to tell me that americans don't want to drive trucks, work in warehouses, truck lines and other jobs that do not require an education?
Never said we need 12 million. But we need some. But how do you propose we deal with the other several million who are here that might be left out in the cold? You REALLY think it's possible to deport all of them? We don't have the resources and our cities would burn from the rioting were we to try to round up all these people. The court system would collapse under the weight of hundreds of thousands of lawsuits from illegal alien parents with anchor babies suing to be allowed to stay. And what of all the families that will be split up?
And if you go to fining employers as a means of getting rid of illegals, it won't work. Allowing certain industries such as ag. and hospitality to continue using illegal alien labor, you're going to wind up with equal protection lawsuits up the ying yang. I don't even know if it can be written into the law allowing a few illegal alien-heavy industries exemptions from penalties for hiring undocumented workers without again running afoul of equal protection issues. I guess the courts will have to determine that.
And even if you could get away with fining some and allowing others, those illegals who lose their jobs will just stay here and live off their kids' welfare money, go deeper underground for jobs and many will resort to crime driving up crime rates. Why would they go back to Mexico? What's to go back to? They have no homes there, no hope of a decent life? Would you go back to that sh-thole after having a taste of the good life here? I wouldn't. I'd just work odd jobs as I could. And that's precisely what will happen. You'll just force them deeper underground.
We've got to stop thinking there's an easy and totally desirable solution to this problem. There isn't. Most likely the best we can hope for is something we can live with. But enforcement only isn't practical nor is amnesty or blanket tolerance. And certainly living with the status quo is a non-starter. We have to get away from absolutist thinking here and start getting a little creative to figure out how to solve this problem. As flawed as the process is, I at least give some credit to the Senate and the president for thinking this out and trying to offer a REALISTIC solution, not just something impractical that plays well to the gallery. Compromise and working through the problem is what will ultimately offer the best solution, as imperfect as it will be, as opposed to chauvenistic-driven spouting.
By the way, the name's Mike, not Bubba. Bubba lives in Chappaqua, NY when he's not chasing skirt among Canadian politicians.
YOur argument completely ignores the societal costs of these illegals. The accumulated costs in welfare, medical, etc. for the illegal immigrants who invade our country, are immense. Don't you care about the law? A country that does not control its borders is not a country any more.
You are NOT preaching to the choir here. Go over to the DU for like-minded blather!
An ignorant and deceitful reply.
AS I just posted to someone else...
I never said we need 12 million. But we need some. But how do you propose we deal with the other several million who are here that might be left out in the cold? You REALLY think it's possible to deport all of them? We don't have the resources and our cities would burn from the rioting were we to try to round up all these people. The court system would collapse under the weight of hundreds of thousands of lawsuits from illegal alien parents with anchor babies suing to be allowed to stay. And what of all the families that will be split up?
And if you go to fining employers as a means of getting rid of illegals, it won't work. Allowing certain industries such as ag. and hospitality to continue using illegal alien labor, you're going to wind up with equal protection lawsuits up the ying yang. I don't even know if it can be written into the law allowing a few illegal alien-heavy industries exemptions from penalties for hiring undocumented workers without again running afoul of equal protection issues. I guess the courts will have to determine that.
And even if you could get away with fining some and allowing others, those illegals who lose their jobs will just stay here and live off their kids' welfare money, go deeper underground for jobs and many will resort to crime driving up crime rates. Why would they go back to Mexico? What's to go back to? They have no homes there, no hope of a decent life? Would you go back to that sh-thole after having a taste of the good life here? I wouldn't. I'd just work odd jobs as I could. And that's precisely what will happen. You'll just force them deeper underground.
We've got to stop thinking there's an easy and totally desirable solution to this problem. There isn't. Most likely the best we can hope for is something we can live with. But enforcement only isn't practical nor is amnesty or blanket tolerance. And certainly living with the status quo is a non-starter. We have to get away from absolutist thinking here and start getting a little creative to figure out how to solve this problem. As flawed as the process is, I at least give some credit to the Senate and the president for thinking this out and trying to offer a REALISTIC solution, not just something impractical that plays well to the gallery. Compromise and working through the problem is what will ultimately offer the best solution, as imperfect as it will be, as opposed to chauvenistic-driven spouting.
By the way, the name's Mike, not Bubba. Bubba lives in Chappaqua, NY when he's not chasing skirt among Canadian politicians.
Have you ever been to places like Memphis, Tennessee? Or any other big city for that matter? Thousands (possibly hundreds of thousands) in each city of perfectly able bodied American citizens who won't get off their fat butts to do anything more than walk out to the mail box to see if their welfare check has arrived. Meanwhile, every business in the city has a help wanted sign in the front window. Are there jobs Americans won't do? Probably not. Are there countless jobs Americans aren't doing? You bet. And not because those jobs aren't available. And they include jobs like working in warehouses, driving trucks, pumping gas..... One of the fixes to our illegal alien problem is to end our welfare system. We need to force some Americans to do jobs they currently won't do.
Oh I see, you prefer to just have people screaming "mega dittos!" rather than having to have your views challenged or to perhaps think long enough to look at the other side of a debate? So preaching to the choir and never ending agreement is what you want to make you feel secure? Whatever happened to discussion and lively debate? Whatever happened to actually examining opposing viewpoints and then rebutting them with facts, reason and logic? Apparently that's been lost under the weight of mindless absolutism and visceral rhetoric, much like that on the left regarding the issue of the liberation of Iraq.
I guess just telling me to go to the DU is easier than actually using substance to defend your views. I guess somehow you find that more satisfying than trying to educate me with a reasoned analysis and exposition of your views. Sad really. I wonder if you would similarly tell Ronald Reagan (no, I'm not comparing myself to that great man) to just go over to the DU too with his very pro-immigration views as well?
By the way, I have spent more time, money and effort helping conservative causes and candidates then you will do in 3 lifetimes, so I don't need you telling me to go the DU. I think you and your intolerance and extremist unthinking absolutism might find a more fitting home over there than my reasoned, rational, thinking, non-ad hominem debate ever would.
I agree. And that is the easiest problem in this whole debacle to fix. How do we do it? Stop paying for illegals' welfare, healthcare, etc. We'll save billions and it won't cost us a dime, or increase the role of Federal government.
Absolutely.
And like the DU, some of these who call themselves "real conservatives" have lost all perspective under the weight of the immigration issue and become ravenous hate mongers against the president largely over a single issue. The only difference is the people at the DU have used Iraq as the issue which took them from 0-100 on the insanity gauge in under 30 seconds. With the absolutists on Free Republic, it's the issue of the little brown people. Like the DU, they ignore all the other things the president has accomplished to focus on this one issue and used it to stoke a seeming uncontrolled inferno of rage.
For the fools at the DU, it's at least a little more understandable because they haven't gotten much of anything they like from the president. But conservatives have gotten 2 conservative attorney generals, tax cuts, 2 conservative justices on the SCOTUS, many more conservative judges on lower federal courts, a ban on PBAs, a strong defense, the president telling France to go to hell and acting vigorously in the nation's defense without playing Mother May I with the UN and on and on. But they now forget all that to focus with fanatic tunnel vision on the few things they've not gotten from Bush.
Realizing Reagan had bigger deficits as a percentage of GNP than Bush has had, raised taxes 3 times (Bush has never raised taxes) and had a TRUE amnesty for illegals, you have to wonder what these nuts would have been saying about Reagan if they had been around or paying attention in 1986. Funny despite that far more checkered record than Bush's, these same conservatives now look at Reagan as a God and Bush as the devil. But I think if the same level of absolutist fanaticism had been around in Reagan's day, these people would have been storming the White House with pitchforks and torches looking to string up the Gipper,
Anyway, good observation. The extremes on both sides have taken debate and the political environment to a very dangerous and unseemly place. Their demonic levels of anger are perfect mirror images of one another.
You were probably being rhetorical...but I remember what these nuts where saying in 1986. The exact same thing they are saying now and deny they said then. I was young, but I paid attention because I was liberal and thought YIPPEE, they are finally turning against their own guy. We're winning, we're winning! (Hangs head in shame.)
I was much, much stupider and on the wrong side then, but I still paid attention and it's really helped me stand firm this time around. Someday, they will be saying "If only President X was more like GWB, now THAT was a TRUE conservative."
I guess he has a plan
Now, instead of hanging out at airports, people like the Larouche disciple I met have the internet. It doesn't make them anymore mainstream or any less fanatical. But it gives them a louder voice. And boy do they like to scream and yell. They've got their issue, and they've found a megaphone. I happened to live in Madison, WI during the 2000 Presidential election. Ralph Nader was THE topic of conversation among the liberal nutjobs who dominate the political scene in Madison. You couldn't drive anywhere without seeing Ralph Nader yard signs. Clearly Ralph Nader was going to be Madison's choice for President in 2000. His supporters were definitely the most vocal, most prominent and most certain that they spoke for the majority. In the end, Nader took just 2% of the Madison vote. There is a difference between zealotry and rational thought. Fortunately, most people choose the later. Unfortunately, zealots find sites like this easy prey for their rants. And we're all worse off for it.
It is cheeper for us in San Diego to pay $5 a head for lettuce than the megga millions a year we here in San Diego are paying for the illegals social services
Perhaps - but, it may not be cheaper for the 299 million rest of us to pay $5 per head.
Has anyone seen exit polls for the 50th?
Please ping me if you get any updates. Thanks.
I did find this live thread, but no early results yet: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1644278/posts
Thanks.
may not be cheaper for the 299 million rest of us to pay
Maybe a good reason for San Diego to receive Federal reimbursement.
This is like a Katriena for us only it is 24/7 week after week , year after year. Not only the financial cost but
our society changed to a third world situation.
It should not be the responsibality of the people of San Diego to support tens of thousands of Mexicans.
With or without illegals working those jobs, you'll still be paying the same in taxes and still likely paying for illegals and their social services. It's not like suddenly the libs. are going to give all that money back or not allow illegals to receive welfare benefits through their kids.
You're right. But it is not the responsibility of the American people to vote out your Senator's (Boxer and Feinstein) and Reps like Pelosi. And it is not the responsibility of the American people to keep your state from selecting Al Gore and John Kerry in Presidential elections. We need more Conservative Federal Judges to help us enforce our Constitution and allow things like Prop 187 to stand. The people of California are not doing their part in that fight, and there is nothing the rest of America can do about it.
And the fact that you are asking for "Federal reimbursement" is a strong indicator of how far we've slipped from "real" conservative principles.
You're welcome.
We are doing with out in this city.
There are thousand of criminals walking free because
there is no more room in the jains and prisons as they
are already filled with illegals who commit murder, rape, etc.
Citizens who work hard, living in nice homes and at the end of their street are illegal camps looking like Tijuana.
They need to chang their society in Mexico rather than change our society in the U.S.
Exactly!!!
I have heard her remarks.
The criricism is on the mark. Her no papers are being taken out of context and the beating is unjustified.
Her remarks and thoughts were directed toward illegals helping with the campaign. No papers are required to help with the campaign. Any body can help.
Her remarks were not addressing voting illegal.
Rush really blew this bu purposely taking it all out of context knowing he was wrong.
This was written in the interest of truth knowing that the gaff might verywell screw her to the wall. An amatuer, she used words that screwed her to the wall.
The 14th amend make the the illegals who have their kids here citizens. This amendment need to redefined.
It is like a group of people walking into your home, eating your food, using your health insur. card., etc.
I can only support myself, not a grooup of people.
San Diego is the largest red county in Calif.
Actually, Cabinet nominations have been sunk with less evidence than SOLICITING ILLEGAL ALIENS to help with campaign - I think you and I both knew she was also encouraging illegal aliens to vote too ; )
That really does not address my point that the U.S. Constitution has no provision for reimbursement of San Diego (or even New Orleans, for that matter). Citizenship under the 14th Amendment is a completely separate issue.
Unfortunately, San Diego doesn't appear to speak for the rest of the state. Your fellow Californians to the north don't seem to feel or care about your pain. If San Diego wants support in its fight to stop money flowing to illegals, it needs to start with California before it starts looking for money from folks in South Dakota.
I listened very carefully to the tape. She said two, distinct, clear sentences, one after the other. (1) "You don't need papers to vote." (2) "You don't need to be a registered voter to help with the campaign."
The AP has actually changed the quote (to a gerund) in order to make it seem like she restated the same thing in two different ways. She didn't. There was a full stop between the two sentences, not a semicolon.
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.