You are scapegoating.
The one who signs this into law will be a REPUBLICAN President.
He could veto it, but he won't. Because he has been pushing it for the last 6 years.
The one who signs this into law will be a REPUBLICAN President.
He could veto it, but he won't. Because he has been pushing it for the last 6 years.
I don't know why you are so sure he will sign it. He was pushing a guest worker program, with the possibility of citizenship for some down the road. He has not been "pushing it for the last 6 years".
But the more important point is a logical one: He's not the Congressional Republicans, most of whom did not support the proposal. There's nothing you can point to that says otherwise. I don't understand why people keep merging multiple people into one person.
It is open knowledge that Bush was liberal on immigration issues.
The one thing that stood between him and amnesty is the Republican house, thanks to the efforts of Dobbs, Savage and others the Republican congress is gone and will be replaced by a Dem one.
So a amnesty program now will be most likely on Dem terms and you are right Bush can still veto it but he mostly likely wont do it.
Still if Congress had been under Republican control, no amnesty program would got through.
It is open knowledge that Bush was liberal on immigration issues.
The one thing that stood between him and amnesty is the Republican house, thanks to the efforts of Dobbs, Savage and others the Republican congress is gone and will be replaced by a Dem one.
So a amnesty program now will be most likely on Dem terms and you are right Bush can still veto it but he mostly likely wont do it.
Still if Congress had been under Republican control, no amnesty program would got through.
Basically, corporate and government sponsored elitist oligarchies to 'manage' the world.