Posted on 06/17/2006 6:15:36 AM PDT by rcocean
But Wilson, a former senator, rejected that charge at a Hudson Institute talk in Washington. And, despite being a Bush appointee (to the Defense Policy Board, a Pentagon advisory panel), he called on his former colleagues to resist White House pressure on the House and Senate to pass a compromise bill that preserves elements of the president's more generous approach and includes a path to citizenship for the millions of illegal immigrants already here. He said the only reason the Senate voted for a more generous bill in the first place was that many senators had been ``intimidated.''
Wilson said that the House Republicans are right in insisting that the Mexican border be closed before any thought is given to a guest-worker program or anything resembling amnesty. That was also the message the winner of last week's House special election in the San Diego area, Republican Brian Bilbray, said voters were sending when they chose him. Build a wall the entire 2,000-mile length of the border, and do it first, Wilson said, or else, ''You'll have 20 million, 35 million, 50 million'' illegals in the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at miami.com ...
Broder as usual lies about prop 187. He has the gall to call Wilson's defense of Prop 187 "revisionist".
The facts are:
1) Prop 187 got 59% of the vote
2) Wilson's support of Prop 187 lead to his his victory in 1994. Just like the Driver License issue helped Arnold.
3) Republicans were losing in Calf *before* Prop 187. Feinstein/boxer/clinton all won election in 1992.
4) Dole/Kemp were against Prop 187 and got fewer votes in 1996 in Calf then any Republican since Jerry Ford in 1976.
5) Broder is part of the "open borders" establishment and his mythology that Prop 187 hurt Republicans is just "open borders" propaganda.
Mr. President, please listen to Wilson.
I didn't read the whole piece, but, since it was written by Broder, I doubt that the tone was in any way anything less than dismissive of any Republican mentioned in the article.
All the "187 doomed the GOP in California" crap is revisionist history.
"..''20 million, 35 million, 50 million'' illegals flooding in are numbers Wilson pulled out of the air..."
And just where did Hagel get the info to support his contention that a 2000 mi. fence is not "practical"?
I'd suggest that I could demonstrate where Hagel's facts come from by using the services of a proctologist supplied with a flashlight.
Thanks for your timeline on California.
I couldn't find Wilson's talk written up in an unbiased way.
Broder's coloumn is the best there was. Which shows how slanted the MSM coverage is.
The plain facts are that legal hispanic citizens of the US are hurt badly by illegal immigration.
"The border is 2000 miles, build a very strong, hi-tech 2000 mile wall backed with whatever # of norder quards you need to secure the Mexican border.
No half measures."
I think more people would look at amnesty, job programs or whatever they want to call it in a better light once a wall was built. Then they could begin to negotiate what to do with people already here.
I was watching Glenn Beck a few nights ago, when he mentioned the idea of a "corporate sponsor" border fence. Different sections could be built and paid for by advertising dollars from large companies. Taco Bell, Frito-Lay, etc. are likely candidates.
Great idea, although it was tongue-in-cheek!
It is strange how few in the GOP leadership seem to notice apparently that it's mostly liberals like Broder and the NY Times who keep saying Prop 187 hurt Republicans, as if they really care whether that happens or not. In reality standing up to illegal immigration is a winning issue for them and that's why liberals want to scare them off from taking advantage of it.
Very true. Also I hope people realize that even if we get "good" legislation we can't roll over and go back to sleep. This will require all us to be ever vigilant on what is "really " going on.
If not for the despicable courts
Well, I can see all of this ending up in the courts too. Even if we have a 4 to 1 margin. I can't help but be reminded of Sean Connery in the Untouchables...
Hagel said the 2,000-mile fence ''is just not practical''
I have never heard more: "We can't do this and we can't do that" BS! BS! BS! We can and we will.
The plain facts are that legal hispanic citizens of the US are hurt badly by illegal immigration.
In more ways than one. Especially if they are supporting this crap.
So Says Robert Novak: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/robertnovak/2006/06/17/201642.html
************************************************
IMMIGRATION TURNABOUT
Within two days last week, House Majority Leader John Boehner changed from sunny optimism about prospects for passing an immigration bill this summer to a bleak, negative outlook. The reason was that Boehner got the word from House Speaker Dennis Hastert.
Boehner on Tuesday was upbeat in addressing a breakfast forum at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which supports a guest worker program. He indicated he would resolve differences between the restrictive House bill and the much more liberal Senate bill by the Fourth of July.
But at a closed luncheon Wednesday at Charlie Palmer's restaurant, attended by financial contributors to House Republicans, Boehner declared that the immigration bill was all but dead. That change followed Boehner's conversation late Tuesday with Hastert, who made clear he did not want to pursue the issue that splits the Republican Party.
The conservatives are coming? Let's hope so.
"I think more people would look at amnesty, job programs or whatever they want to call it in a better light once a wall was built. Then they could begin to negotiate what to do with people already here. "
I certainly hope not, though there are plenty of politicians trying to use the argument, just secure the border and then we promise to reconsider amnesty. Meantime, Bush and the Senate are blackmailing us, at the risk of national security, by saying, no amnesty, no border security.
As far as I'm concerned, there should be NO negotiation on what to do with the illegals. Our government is obligated to protect this country. They MUST effectively secure the border and they MUST enforce the law. Those who refuse to do so should suffer, at least, the political consequences.
Build the wall, enforce the laws, prosecute employers, deny welfare benefits, and the illegals will deport themselves.
Unfortunately this is NOT part of Bush's North American Union agenda.
David Broder is an old nerd.
Correct!
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.