Posted on 06/02/2007 10:22:51 AM PDT by nj26
President Bush’s advocacy of an immigration overhaul and his attacks on critics of the plan are provoking an unusually intense backlash from conservatives who form the bulwark of his remaining support, splintering his base and laying bare divisions within a party whose unity has been the envy of Democrats.
It has pitted some of Mr. Bush’s most stalwart Congressional and grass-roots backers against him, sparking a vitriol that has at times exceeded anything seen yet between Mr. Bush and his supporters, who have generally stood with him through the toughest patches of his presidency. Those supporters now view him as pursuing amnesty for foreign law breakers when he should be focusing on border security.
Postings on conservative Web sites this week have gone so far as to call for Mr. Bush’s impeachment, and usually friendly radio hosts, commentators and Congressional allies are warning that he stands to lose supporters — a potentially damaging development, they say, when he needs all the backing he can get on other vital matters like the war in Iraq.
“I think President Bush hurts himself every time he says it is not amnesty,” said Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, referring to the bill’s legalization process for immigrants. “We are not all that stupid.”
This week, in discussing Mr. Bush’s recent comments accusing conservative critics of the immigration legislation of fear-mongering, Rush Limbaugh told listeners: “I just wish he hadn’t done it because he’s not going to lose me on Iraq, and he’s not going to lose me on national security. But he might lose some of you.”
Such sentiments have reverberated through talk radio, conservative publications like National Review and Fox News. They have also appeared on Web sites including RedState.com and FreeRepublic.com...
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
So I assume that there are newbies here that are white House mouthpieces..
For legal aliens trying to apply for immigrant status, the current laws are written in stone because these laws are strongly enforced. Yet for illegal aliens, the current laws are not written in stone because these laws are not enforced at all. This means our government officials are selectively enforcing immigration laws by choosing which laws will be enforced and which laws will not be enforced.
If government officials are willfully not enforcing existing illegal immigrations laws, these same government officials will not enforce all of the new illegal immigration laws they expect to write into law.
But our government officials can pretend to enforce illegal immigration laws by merely passing new illegal immigration laws that require a national identification card and special visa just for those aliens who broke our laws.
These new illegal immigration laws will only cost taxpayers billions or even trillions of dollars to just implement, that is, just to set up the people and resources needed to service and process tens of millions of illegal aliens.
The comprehensive illegal immigration bill is a way for government officials (Congress, Senate, Administration, Governors) to pretend that illegal alien enforcement is happening by handing out national I.D. cards and special visas. These handouts will look like our government officials are finally enforcing a law any law for illegal aliens. Then the news media will report these historic handouts and say what a great job these government officials did to begin enforcing our laws.
Yet no deportations or securing the borders will occur because government officials will continue to selectively enforce any law for illegal aliens.
Thanks for clearing that up, I did not know the details of that.
Not necessarily newbies, but operatives nonetheless...
IIRC, it was about how Brown funded the construction of a military academy in Oakland. That’s the only reason Savage mentioned why he donated to Brown.
In any case, I maintain that you cannot live in San Francisco for too long without being corrupted in some way. Maybe he relishes living in the filth so his anger always burns. *shrugs*
President Bush is willingly riding shotgun with Ted Kennedy at the wheel, and the vehicle is careening towards the bridge...
They misquoted someone I know this past week, too. Actually, they attributed someone else’s comment to her, along with hers.
The Gray Lady is senile.
“But now, all the Republicans can do is try and stuff it with some pork for their respective districts and states and let is sail through.”
A republican can filibuster. That’ll kill it. The article says that scepter has been raised.
Frankly, it’s not that easy for an “operative” to move opinions here on FR. You can put up persuasive arguments and get people to think things over a second time, but you aren’t going to change their minds over something as basic as this.
They would be better advised to visit regularly just to keep an eye on what important segments of the base are saying and where their current interests lie.
It’s a good early warning system.
Interest in controlling the borders was fairly marginal here earlier, with a small group of freepers who intensely supported it; but it has gradually increased, and now is virtually unanimous. The argument over the Harriet Miers fiasco was a lot more two-sided than amnesty has turned out to be, with some people defending Bush’s right to nominate her right to the end. I scarcely see that with the amnesty bill.
So did Reagan. I used to cringe when Reagan would say he would share SDI with the Soviets. He was wrong on that point. I don't want a President to pander to populism. Bush is wrong on immigration and he won't change. He's wrong on spending and a few other issues as well.
But you're getting off point. Yous said "George Bush wants to tear America down". Nonsense. It's lunacy to think any President WANTS to tear down America. As misguided as Jimmy Carter was he didn't WANT to tear down America either. Just say they're wrong on an issue and leave it at that.
The gist of the article is that if you are against this bill you are against the best interests of the country, you are ignorant, not a patriot, and flat out wrong.
President Bush and all the rest who support this bill, Dems and Repubs alike, are traitors.
“I used to cringe when Reagan would say he would share SDI with the Soviets.”
Thanks for that reminder
They just grab quotes quotes in the direction they are looking for. The fact they do not get the citation right is an indication they are fishing only.
“The NYT is wishful thinking if it believes the current irrational tone on FR represents the majority of the conservative“base”. Half of the people posting here will probably disappear once the bill is killed and the borders are left wide open for several more years.”
Earth to Earth dweller!
Bush isn’t going to enforce the border even if the bill passes.
He won’t find discretionary funds,
he’s already done that ploy.
Do your job, Mr. President, and ENFORCE THE LAW!!
between Nov 7, 2008 and Jan 19, 2009, the big picture will become clear to you, and you will eat these words:
“It’s lunacy to think any President WANTS to tear down America.”
No it isn’t.....the writing is on the wall, ceiling, and floor.....and a bunch of wildcat anti-sovereignty side agreements south of the border.....and btw I said “America as we have known and loved it”. Defending this guy at this point is indefensible. Keep your eye on G8....it’ll jerk the covers from him even more!
WRITE! WRITE! WRITE! WRITE! TILL YOU RUN OUT OF INK IN YOUR PEN!
Bombard the Democrats as well, especially the ones that ran on an anti illegal immigration plank and the ones in marginal districts who could be vulnerable. keep pounding on them. This is a bipartisan issue not a Conservative or Liberal issue BUT AN AMERICAN issue.
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.