Posted on 06/03/2007 7:17:53 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
An anonymous White House official said neither the people on the far left nor far right are going to get what they want on the immigration bill. Could have fooled me, since that farthest of far leftists, Sen. Ted Kennedy, said, "This bill is our best chance to fix our broken system." Go figure.
Truly, President Bush's immigration policy has always been mystifying, but even more troubling is his attitude toward its conservative opponents.
I don't suggest President Bush has a duty to cater to conservatives on immigration because they have stood by him on the war. This isn't about conservatives or political reciprocation, but what's best for the nation.
But I do believe the president should hesitate before assuming the worst of motives in the very people who have tirelessly defended him, particularly on the war, against the people who are now his best friends on this abominable immigration bill.
Sadly, this is nothing new. Too often there is an inverse relationship between the level of graciousness President Bush metes out versus that he receives. He sometimes reserves his harshest words for his allies.
Such was the case when he attacked his conservative critics of the bill. But because I continue to believe President Bush is an honorable man pursuing policies he believes are right, I don't question his good intentions on immigration. Too bad he doesn't likewise give the benefit of the doubt to conservatives opposing him. I believe he is wrong both about the bill and the mindset and motives of most conservatives opposing it.
President Bush is wrong that conservatives are trying "to frighten people" into opposing the bill. They are trying to jolt lawmakers into recognizing the inevitable destructiveness of the bill, to national security, the rule of law and the long-term solvency and cultural cohesiveness of this nation.
President Bush is wrong that those who "want to kill the bill" are not doing "what's right for America." He's got it exactly backward when he says opponents are looking "at a narrow slice" of the bill because they are "determined to find fault" with it. The only things that appear redeeming about this monstrosity are insignificant "narrow slices" that are wholly outweighed by the bill's noxious provisions. If we must use the term "narrow slices" in connection with this legislation, we should do so to describe that narrow slice of border fence that has been built or is likely to be built in the reasonably near future as opposed to the hundreds of miles that were promised.
Certain supporters of the bill are also egregiously out of line in ascribing racist or nativist motives to opponents, who at worst can be accused of striving to preserve the unique American culture, which, by the way, prides itself in being color blind and guaranteeing equal protection under the law irrespective of race or ethnicity.
Proponents are wrong and grossly irresponsible for downplaying the fiscal burden this bill will place on an already entitlement-beleaguered federal budget. While proponents are busy quibbling over the semantic appropriateness of the opponents' use of the term "amnesty," they are conveniently sidestepping the assaults on the rule of law the bill will entail. And while proponents are accusing opponents of mischaracterizing the bill, it is the proponents who are pretending the bill will reduce family-based, assimilation-unfriendly immigration and increase merit-based, assimilation-friendly immigration, when it will do precisely the opposite.
Proponents are firing epithets at opponents and accusing them of emotionalizing the issue, but again, the reverse is true. The proponents are the ones avoiding the facts and the very real concerns voiced by opponents. Many conservative proponents are blinded to real dangers in the bill by their monomaniacal attachment to economic growth at any cost. Others seem to have a romantic fixation with our heritage of immigration and wrongly interpret opposition to illegal and anarchically unregulated immigration as a betrayal of our national compact.
Opponents of this bill are not anti-immigrant, nativists, enemies of business or backwoods restrictionists. They are Americans who are fighting to preserve the unique American culture and will not be intimidated by the politically correct tactics and race baiting of many of the proponents. At the very least they are fighting to preserve: 1) a cultural commitment to the principles embodied in the greatest constitution ever written and adopted by man and 2) a societal consensus in the absolute moral values undergirding that instrument, which are inspired by a belief in God and the dignity of human beings created in His image.
Opponents are acting in good faith, and they deserve better – and so does America.
Since when is enforcing the laws on the books a “Far Right” position? I wonder if W would be good enough to list all the other optional laws for us.
Don't you like how Bush has changed the tone in Washington?
Most proponents know very well that this bill would bloat the federal budget.
It represents millions more dependent voters and more power for the federal government. Indeed, this whole issue is about gaining more power for the governors (them) over the governed (us).
The Beltway is running a power grab on the rest of America.
It is good and to the point. It also deserves an answer. Why? We know why the ‘house of lords’ wants it, I just can’t figure out why the President is trying to force this slimy abomination down the throats of those who have stood by him for the last six years.
Bush exhibits classic signs of having a masochistic personality disorder.
Can you be an honorable man and reward lawbreakers of the country you are leading?
The GOOD NEWS is President Bush has finally found an issue about which he is passionate enough to b-slap the opposition over.
The BAD NEWS is the issue is amnesty and the opposition is US!
To President Bush, anyone more conservative than his good buddy and ally, Ted Kennedy, is "Far Right".
He has lost it to the extent that I question his sanity.
Hey David ... I'll say it for you.
George W. Bush's policies and actions in the White House have been opposed to the beliefs of the vast majority of people who elected him.
No Child Left Behind? No thanks. Prescription Drugs? No thanks. Failure to veto McCain-Feingold? No thanks. Failure to enact meaningful tax reform? No thanks. Largest growth in government spending? No thanks.
The list goes on and on and on. Bush has never failed to "reach across the aisle" to the people who for years now have constantly threatened him with impeachment, have called him everything but a Child of God, have attempted to usurp his authority as president.
And every time he reaches across the aisle to Ted "The Swimmer" Kennedy who is a murdering SOB, George W. Bush turns his back on me.
I will grant you that he gave us strict constructionists like we asked for, but one of them only after we raised hell.
Yet I have stood by the President. Defended him and supported him. I have campaigned for him. I have convinced people that they can hold their noses and vote for him. All Bush has left me to support him on is the WOT (and there he's working very hard to screw it up - or at least shift the blame).
So I'll say it, David. Now is the time for Bush to ante up.
Drop this amnesty crap. If you can't do it because it is the RIGHT THING TO DO, then do it because your supporters are demanding it!
And, while we're on the subject, Mr. President, the next time you feel like calling me a bigot or saying I'm unpatriotic, just STFU. That dog don't hunt and it just makes you look like even more of a leftist b@$#@%d.
Excellent editorial. David Limbaugh’s comments are almost always good, but this has the look of something that has been worked over with extreme care. Every word is carefully chosen.
Frankly, if the President can’t understand what Limbaugh is saying to him, he is either invincibly ignorant or has sold out to donors who want an endless supply of cheap labor and expect the taxpayers to foot the bill. Limbaugh’s message couldn’t be clearer. Our country, our culture, our respect for the rule of law, our constitutional system that has never been equalled anywhere in history: all are at stake.
What a horrible mess this is!
Like father like son. Bush doesn't care about the conservatives in this country. We were the useful idiots who elected him. He's got more important matters on his mind.
Jorge’s father tried to destroy the Republican Party at a time it should have been flourishing. At the time, I cannot think of Republican President betraying those who voted for him in a greater way than Bush breaking his Read My Lips Pledge. Of course, he did it in his first term and voters served justice and it would have been Perot not Clinton had Perot not clearly exhibited that he did not have the sanity for the job. Now Jorge is going against those who supported him in his second term. This set of Bushes may have some claims to Texas, but deep down they are Rockefeller NWO Republicans from the east coast elite establishment, stupid and stubborn, and eventually fated to the scorn and contempt of the lower classes like myself.
Rush’s younger smarter brother bump.
Jorge Arbusto has BDS.
“Bush exhibits classic signs of having a masochistic personality disorder.”
What??? Then why are the American taxpayers and citizens about to take a beating with Bush’s amnesty? Bush wants cheap wage-slaves to man his ranch and Kennedy wants cheap wage slaves as gardeners, cooks, and butlers in for the Kennedy compound on Martha’s Vineyard - you get to pay for their free health care, education, and freebies. I think the Heritage Foundation calculated 2.5 trillion in costs to the American taxpayer. Bush and Teddy Kennedy have the whip-hand right now - prepare to feel the pain. I hope for your sake you are a masochist - BOHICA.
Yes, very good!!!
Except for the following statement:
"I don't question his good intentions on immigration."
At this point I do question his good intentions on immigration. It's becoming more apparent that open borders will lead to no borders -- a pre-cursor to the official establishment of the North American Union, or whatever they are calling it these days.
In fact, I believe that is why the borders were not sealed on 9-11.
>>The BAD NEWS is the issue is amnesty and the opposition is US!
Conservatives: Prey for President Bush
Pretty clear why the WOD has not been won.
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.