Immigration bill's demise suggests many are OK with status quo

San Francisco Chronicle | June 9, 2007 | Carolyn Lochhead

[sonic109]

I agree. They talk Homeland Security , them want to leave the boarders wide open . Tel me that’s not a contradiction .

[Kay Ludlow]

We do not need a NEW law, we just need to ENFORCE the current laws.

Actually, we could use a couple new laws. One that redefines a citizen by birthright as one born to a citizen or legal immigrant; one the explicitly states that no 'undocumented person' (or their children) are entitled to any federal $$$ - no food stamps, no medicare, no housing subsidies etc. If we do that, and enforce it, we could certainly slow down the problem without building the wall - or at least only those states that are in favor of it will be paying the bills rather than all of us...

[puroresu]

The official “liberal” party line on this is that we only have two options:

A) Leave things as they are now, with millions of illegals in our country, and more coming in all the time.

B) Pass the Kennedy-Bush immigration bill, which we’re told will “solve” our illegal alien problem by legalizing all the illegals while doing nothing to stop the flow of additional millions into our country in future years.

So in media-speak, if you’re against Kennedy-Bush, you must favor the status quo since those are the only two possible alternatives. After all, “we can’t deport twelve million people without becoming a police state”. The media simply brush aside the possibility of solving the problem via attrition. Just enforce the existing laws against employers hiring illegals, cut off all freebies for illegals, and actually guard the border.

If illegals can’t get jobs or welfare, they’ll go home on their own. Deportation problem solved.

[Eastbound]

"The collapse of the giant immigration overhaul in the Senate might demonstrate that the dreaded status quo -- 12 million people living in the country illegally and more arriving each day -- is not really so dreadful after all."

That's a stretch. Try,

'The collapse of the giant immigration overhaul in the Senate might demonstrate that the people want existing laws enforced.'

[USconvoy.com]

That wall or fence will never be built. Were on the verge of something bigger than just illegal immigration. This is just another piece to the ultimate puzzle

[A Strict Constructionist]

“Graham actually said that?”

“Day after day,
Alone on the hill,
The man with the foolish grin is keeping perfectly still,
But nobody wants to know him,
They can see that he’s just a fool,
And he never gives an answer,
But the fool on the hill
Sees the sun going down,
And the eyes in his head,
See the world spinning ‘round.”

The Beatles on Lindsey Graham.

[P-Marlowe]

Conservatives did not "win" this past week.

I beg to differ. I watched what happened this week. I participated by writing to congress. I talked about it with friends and neighbors. I publicly and seriously called for the impeachment of (my once beloved president) George Bush over this.

This bill was a monstrosity and was destined to pass until the conservatives and patriots in this country rose up in unison to condemn it and to threaten those senators who were willing to cram it down the American's throats. If such a monstrosity cannot pass the senate, it will never pass the house, where Congressmen are elected every two years.

We got the fence authorized by Congress. We have united in an effort to shut down congress over Amnesty. We must now stay united in an effort to get this fence built. Once Congress gets its act together on enforcement, the American people will be amenable to dealing fairly with those who have come here seeking to share in our unique American Culture.

We must keep the pressure on. This was simply a skirmish in what is clearly going to be a long and expensive war. together we have tossed overboard the symbolic crates of tea. Undoubtedly we have angered our enemies. The Redcoats will be coming. We must be prepared to meet them in the streets.

Message to Congress:

[RachelFaith]

I’m not ok with status quo. But I prefer it to amnesty.

---

Damn Straight !

[Old Professer]

Weeks ago I ventured that the bill might just be a sham to pull support for senators smart enough to change direction to go with the wind; that they really like it the way it is because it gives the Dems two ways to attack the Reps and the Reps need more voters while they need to also find out what tune they need to play to make the choir happy.

The Dems can say the Admin is weak on border control while also making nice with the sanctuary movement all the while knowing the dependent underclass edging closer to voter status is solidly in their corner.

[muawiyah]

"Amnesty" without the prospect of citizenship is just another way around the 13th Amendment.

The moral thing to do is hold Mexico to a quota ~ no more than X number ~ and enforce it.

At the moment they are demanding more immigrant spots than any other nation in history.

[WashingtonSource]

Carolyn is in the Wall Street Journal editorial board school of philosophy. Open borders are OK with her.

[P-Marlowe]

The moral thing to do is hold Mexico to a quota ~ no more than X number ~ and enforce it.

They do have a quota and we do hold them to it.

But that is only in regard to LEGAL immigration. Those people have to go through hell to get here and to get their papers in order. Those who get here illegally don't have to do anything other than steal someone else's ID and then go steal another job from Americans.

[muawiyah]

You did catch the "enforce it" part didn't you?

Just set a number and anyone over the number gets sent back. If illegals are streaming over the border, then nobody in Mexico gets a visa until enough illegals are sent back to provide openings in the quota.

[ruination]

Carolyn Lochhead has a history of pro-illegal alien writing.

[P-Marlowe]

You did catch the "enforce it" part didn't you?

The INS does enforce laws in regard to LEGAL immigration. The Government does not enforce laws in regard to ILLEGAL immigration.

We deport people all the time who are here legally and who violate the terms of their legal immigration status. My daughter in law was nearly deported back to Canada because the INS misplaced one of her documents. They had no pity on her.

Yes we do deport a lot of legal immigrants. They have agreed to deportation as a penalty for violation of their immigration contract. Illegals have made no such contract. They have not agreed to be deported if they violate the terms of their visas since they have no visas. So we don't deport them.

If this sounds like Bizzaro World, it is.

[xzins]

I disagree, PM. We are forever doomed to play defense. We don’t have the house, the senate, or the presidency on this one.

We cannot propose anything.

Plan A AND Plan B are monstrosities. We currently have a monstrosity. We HAVE amnesty. It’s “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t even look” amnesty.

The fix:

Change the House, the Senate, and the Presidency.

[xzins]

Bizarro World it is...which is my point.

We have de facto amnesty and just avoided de jure amnesty.

Unless you tell me they’re sending out the deportation squads starting Monday, then I’m right.

[P-Marlowe]

We cannot propose anything.

We proposed the fence.

We got the fence.

Well, sorta.

Maybe.

3 miles anyway.

[xzins]

I laughed when I heard those senate debates and I heard GW’s “mean ole conservatives” press conference.

Not one reporter had the sense to ask him:

“Mr President, who has been contracted to build the fence and what is the start date?”

[P-Marlowe]

“Mr President, who has been contracted to build the fence and what is the start date?”

1) Halliburton.

2) When hell freezes over.