Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senators unveil historic immigration plan (deal's shaky)
New York Daily News ^ | May 18, 2007 | Michael Mcauliff

Posted on 05/18/2007 1:02:27 AM PDT by Baladas

Bush backs sweeping changes; House prospects uncertain

WASHINGTON – A remarkable alliance of Senate liberals, conservatives and the White House struck a deal on an immigration reform bill Thursday that would allow up to 12 million illegal immigrants to become legal and remain in the country.

In exchange, the lawmakers agreed to build a vast wall along the Mexican border, double the nation's border patrol and institute other enforcement controls.

The deal was hailed as historic by both sides, and President Bush said the proposal would "help enforce our borders, but equally importantly, it'll treat people with respect

Despite the striking bipartisan support, the proposal immediately came under attack from the left and right, and it wasn't clear whether it would survive to be signed into law.

"It's a good beginning," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. "We hope they improve on it during their amendment process. We will have our process."

"I'm going to oppose this," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., "No matter how they disguise it, it's amnesty."

Even Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd, of West Virginia, broke ranks early, calling it amnesty that rewards "those who break our immigration laws."

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic presidential candidate, was noncommittal.

(Excerpt) Read more at spokesmanreview.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: amnesty; immigration; uscongress
This looks like it's already in some trouble if Sheets is even coming out against it.
1 posted on 05/18/2007 1:02:30 AM PDT by Baladas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Baladas
So build the border infrastructure so it can be enforced 24/7 by the proper levels of BP agents allowed to actually perform the enforcement.

The gov't has proven that they are unwilling to enforce any laws that they pass. Their cred' is so sorely lacking that they need to so they can walk the walk. There is still a fair amount of drug trafficing involved in this somehow.

2 posted on 05/18/2007 1:12:43 AM PDT by Paladin2 (Islam is the religion of violins, NOT peas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baladas
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic presidential candidate, was noncommittal.

And that's the way she'll respond when she's president... the day after NYC, DC or LA is incinerated.

3 posted on 05/18/2007 1:17:12 AM PDT by johnny7 ("Issue in Doubt." -Col. David Monroe Shoup, USMC 1943)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baladas
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic presidential candidate, was noncommittal is waiting to see which way the wind blows.
4 posted on 05/18/2007 1:20:37 AM PDT by Razz Barry (,i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baladas
Well, praise God if it's "shaky." I think it's generally accepted (like last time) that nothing is better than anything the Senate can come up with (aside from urging enforcement of existing laws that would cure most of the problem).

Just the idea that we have these traitors - the president in collusion -- ignoring the American people and selling our nation's sovereignty for a quick buck is enough to send chills down my spine.

Obviously, we will all have to cut back our sleep and/or recreation in order to constantly monitor our "representative government," as well as the criminals (foreign and domestic) they are attempting to serve.

5 posted on 05/18/2007 1:24:14 AM PDT by Types_with_Fist (I'm on FReep so often that when I read an article at another site I scroll down for the comments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Types_with_Fist

What I don’t understand about opponents of this bill is why you would rather have increased border patrol as well as the construction of a border fence voted down just so you don’t have to accept amnesty. Protecting our country from muslim terrorists sneaking in from Mexico should take priority over whether or not guest workers are allowed to seek legal status.


6 posted on 05/18/2007 1:53:15 AM PDT by B. Chezwick (He who stands against Israel stands against God. - Rev. Jerry Falwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: B. Chezwick
Because we [me] believes there is enough law in this country to build fences and control the boarders, and it is being ignored. Amnesty is rewarding criminals, should we let the bank robber keep the money?
7 posted on 05/18/2007 3:07:23 AM PDT by tiger-one (The night has a thousand eyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Baladas
Even Democratic Sen. Robert Byrd, of West Virginia, broke ranks early, calling it amnesty that rewards "those who break our immigration laws."

Go Sheets!

8 posted on 05/18/2007 3:19:09 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner ("Si vis pacem para bellum")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baladas

When George”The Mortician” Bush signs this bill into law, he will have buried the GOP for all time!


9 posted on 05/18/2007 3:21:51 AM PDT by RdhseRat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baladas

In exchange, the lawmakers agreed to build a vast wall along the Mexican border, double the nation’s border patrol and institute other enforcement controls.

None of this would ever be funded. It’s just eyewash to reel in the suckers.


10 posted on 05/18/2007 3:34:06 AM PDT by saganite (Billions and billions and billions----and that's just the NASA budget!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baladas
There'll be amnesty but the money will NEVER be appropriated to build the border fence. Its a giant hoax perpetrated on the American people. "Compromise?" This ain't the Mother Of All Compromises. Its more like national surrender.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

11 posted on 05/18/2007 3:38:06 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goldstategop

+1, build the wall first, enforce the border and kick out all those who have committed violent crimes. THEN we’ll TALK about what to do with the rest that are still here. The RINO senators and Bush should be ashamed of themselves. And mark my words, if this passes the GOP is toast as far as being a viable political party in this country.


12 posted on 05/18/2007 4:08:23 AM PDT by LoneStarLegend78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: B. Chezwick
What I don’t understand about opponents of this bill is why you would rather have increased border patrol as well as the construction of a border fence voted down just so you don’t have to accept amnesty.

I guess we are just concerned that the Muslims will still have an America they can blow up.

13 posted on 05/18/2007 5:53:00 AM PDT by Types_with_Fist (I'm on FReep so often that when I read an article at another site I scroll down for the comments.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson