Posted on 09/09/2006 2:09:41 PM PDT by Graybeard58
Chicago activists marched 50 miles to House Speaker Dennis Hastert's house last weekend to protest congressional inaction over reforming immigration laws and what they say is his anti-immigrant stance. In Phoenix, protesters rallied at the state's Capitol, also to highlight the stalemate in Washington.
Bob Johnson is equally exercised. The structural engineer from Buffalo Grove, Ill., argues the other side of 2006's Great Immigration Debate - that the US needs to send home illegal immigrants and gain better control of its borders - but he says he cannot believe Congress is punting on immigration reform. He's been writing letters to his congressman and senators and says he may not vote in November or he may vote for a third-party or write-in candidate.
The decision by congressional leaders not to try to bridge the big gulf between the House and Senate versions of immigration reform, at least not before the November midterm elections, is touching off a backlash that may deliver a sting to some incumbent lawmakers.
How big the backlash grows may not be known until the day after the election, but it's surfacing in blogs, letters to the editor, and record-low approval ratings for Capitol Hill.
"When you have both Bob Novak and David Broder writing the same column about Congress's failure to act on immigration, you know something is wrong," says Tamar Jacoby, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute in New York, referring to two well-known columnists who typically have very different views. "People on both the right and left will see it as a huge failure" if Congress ends its term without a bill.
Certainly, many Americans are worked up over immigration. The issue sparked huge rallies and marches in the spring, and has been the subject of endless Lou Dobbs reports. Over the summer, House
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
Good point. We pay for illegal immigrants, one way or another.
Where's the money coming from to "fully fund enforcement"? Not a dime more out of my pocket, I tell you. But don't let me stop you from donating of your own free will.
If it can't be done with the money I'm already paying to fund the behemoth in D.C., then I can very well do without. Half the people where I live speak Spanish most of the time anyway, and very few of them are Mexican.
Are you saying that I should vote for a quasi-defeatocrat instead?
Didn't you learn what 'voting' and 'democracy' meant in high school or college...
...you know, where a voter is supposed to vote for the candidate that best represents their issues?
I guess that in your world, one must vote for the candidate that doesn't represent your issues.
Rather than insult people here, why not put the blame where it belongs? On the RINO politicans who want to give our country away. If they wanted our votes, they shouldn't have alienated their base. With all the faxes, emails, phone calls, and bricks sent to Congress this last year, they can't use the excuse that they didn't know! The House knew, so the Senate and WH must've known as well but didn't care what we wanted. That attitude has its consequences.
Very interesting theory. Since I don't know very much about the checks and procedures of the Social Security Administration, I can't dispute what you have offered. But it does seem to me that if Social Security can determine a number account to be bogus at payout time, it should be able to determine that number account to be bogus at collection time. No?
" But it does seem to me that if Social Security can determine a number account to be bogus at payout time, it should be able to determine that number account to be bogus at collection time"
I guess as long as the money is rolling in, the trust doesn't mind the abuse?
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.