Posted on 07/01/2010 8:27:45 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
With immigration stories dominating headlines nearly every week, President Obama is delivering a speech Thursday morning that will frame the issue on his own terms -- calling for comprehensive legislation and the importance of keeping the border secure.
But he is not expected to announce any new policy during the 10:45 a.m. address to an audience of 250 religious, business, labor, and community leaders and law enforcement and elected officials at American University, administration officials said. Nor is the Justice Department going to announce its decision on a lawsuit in Arizona, where a new law makes it easier for police to detain suspected illegal immigrants.
Obama officials have been widely critical of the law since it was passed and signed by the Arizona governor this spring. But in the Virginia suburb of Prince William County, about 40 minutes from Washington, local leaders have called for passage of a similar law.
"The president's view is that there's been a lot in the news about immigration lately," deputy press secretary Bill Burton said Wednesday. "There's been the Arizona law, there's been meetings about it, there's been protests about it. He thought this was a good time to talk plainly with the American people about his views on immigration."
The president has been looking for ways to appear more proactive, rather than reactive, on immigration -- a hot-button political issue that is important to Hispanics in the Democratic base, who could play an important part in the outcome of the midterm elections.
He met with reform advocates Monday and a group of Hispanic members of Congress on Tuesday. While campaigning for the White House in 2008, Obama promised to take on an overhaul of immigration law early in his first term.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Is it just me, or are his eyes drooping? Is he drunk or hung over? Or is he boring himself to sleep?
If the public understood that legalizing the status of the 12 to 20 million illegal aliens would permit them to sponsor at least another 66 million more LEGAL immigrants, the poll results would be much different. On immigration generally, Americans want less, not more, immigration.
Just be thankful that we are not like him!!
He's saying our borders are too big - it's not possible to seal them...it's impossible & can't be done!!
Just like he said about the surge in Iraq!!
The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from Georgia, Oklahoma, and Arizona proving that it does. During the 2006 amnesty debate, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) commissioned a Zogby poll offering respondents not the false choice between mass deportation or amnesty (a word CIS did not use in the survey), but rather a three-way choice between mass deportation, earned legalization, and attrition — and attrition was preferred two-to-one over legalization.
Another lofty speech about nothing. Here, let me write it for the teleprompter right now:
"Let me clear on one thing, and that thing is, that this problem is not going to get better on it's own. We know that. We need solutions not rhetoric. Unity of purpose and not the disunity of hate. People are suffering, both here and in nations that inspire people to make the arduous journey trying to get here. Let me be clear, though those people have broken alleged laws, they are not lawbreakers. Solutions that are necessary must reflect this basic tenet of our national history and our lofty ideals for the global world. We have welcoming arms but know that people are struggling in border states which represent the ideals and character of our nation. Let me be clear, though I inherited this border situation on our borders, I do not intend to let this situation deteriorate further in light of our dreams for our future. I propose this, while we reflect on our national policy of immigration and the prosperity we seek to preserve and expand with an eye our national character and the future going forward..."
Until Juan McCain can lie and hoodwink his way to another term in the Senate. Just don't need this contentious issue front and center, and complicating things for Juan since he's been the Senate's biggest (living) amnesty pusher.
THE TRUTH ABOUT AMNESTY
Definition: Amnesty, from the same Greek root as “amnesia,” forgives past crimes and removes them from the record for future purposes. In the context of immigration, amnesty is commonly defined as granting legal status to a group of individuals unlawfully present in a country. It overlooks the alien’s illegal entry and ongoing illegal presence and creates a new legal status that allows the recipient to live and work in the country.
The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986: The textbook example of an amnesty. The 1986 law’s path to citizenship was not automatic. The legislation stipulated several requirements to receive amnesty, including payment of application fees, acquisition of English-language skills, understanding of American civics, a medical exam, and registration for military service. Individuals convicted of a felony or three misdemeanors were ineligible. No one disputes that this act provided amnesty. Supporters said it would be a “one-time” amnesty. It was estimated that one million would apply, but the true number turned out to be 2.7 million.
The Secure Borders, Economic Opportunity and Immigration Reform Act of 2007 [aka McCain-Kennedy CIR bill]: This bill resembled the 1986 amnesty in several important ways. Like that law, it would have granted amnesty to individuals unlawfully present in the United States. Its provisions proved that it was definitely an “amnesty,” which its proponents, including President Obama, denied. Specifically,
• Only illegal aliens were eligible. Created a new “Z” visa exclusively for illegal aliens, granting legal status to those who have willfully violated U.S. laws and denying that benefit to law-abiding aliens who have played by the rules.
• Immigration laws were set aside. Before anyone even applied for a probationary Z visa, the legislation would have set aside the immigration laws that currently criminalize the presence of illegal aliens. The bill waived compliance with several laws as a condition for eligibility for the amnesty, including those concerning illegal entry, failure to appear for a removal proceeding, fraud in obtaining documentation to enter the United States, falsely claiming citizenship, and reentry after having been ordered removed.
• Eligibility leads to permanent residence. Probationary Z visas could be valid for years. The Z visa could be renewed every four years indefinitely. The bill granted legal status to virtually all of the 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens who are in the country today, and there was no cap on the total number of illegal aliens who could receive Z visa status.
Impact of Amnesty: In analyzing the 2007 CIR bill, Robert Rector of The Heritage Foundation stated, “The main fiscal impact…will occur through two mechanisms: (1) the grant of amnesty, with accompanying access to Social Security, Medicare and welfare benefits, to 12 million illegal immigrants who are overwhelmingly low skilled; and (2) a dramatic increase in chain immigration, which will also be predominantly low skilled. The bottom line is that high school dropouts are extremely expensive to U.S. taxpayers. It does not matter whether the dropout comes from Ohio, Tennessee, or Mexico. It does matter that the Senate immigration bill would increase the future flow of poorly educated immigrants into the U.S. and grant amnesty and access to government benefits to millions of poorly educated illegal aliens already here. Such legislation would inevitably impose huge costs on U.S. taxpayers.”
Heritage research has concluded that the cost of amnesty alone would be $2.6 trillion. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen. Amnesty is forever.
The Alternative to a Blanket Amnesty:
The proponents of amnesty are wont to create the false choice between a blanket amnesty and mass deportation of 12 to 20 million illegal aliens. In reality, we have other choices and alternatives that don’t reward people who have broken our laws with the right to stay and work here and an eventual path to citizenship. The 12 to 20 million illegal aliens did not enter this country overnight and they will not leave overnight. Attrition through enforcement works. We have empirical data from experiences in Georgia, Colorado, and Arizona proving that it does. Specifically, we need to:
• Secure the borders. You cannot deal with those already here illegally without cutting off the endless supply of those wanting to enter illegally. Until the borders are secured, it is absurd to discuss additional guest worker programs and amnesty.
• Fully implement the US-VISIT Program. There are over 4 million aliens now in illegal status, i.e., people who entered legally as tourists or students or temporary workers but did not leave when their visa expired. We need a system that tracks who enters and leaves the country and deport those who overstay their visas. More than 30% of our illegal alien population come from visa overstays.
• Enforce existing laws against employers. Jobs are the magnets that attract illegal aliens. The government’s failure to enforce existing laws against employers and to create a proper employee verification program must end. The highly successful and effective voluntary E-Verify program has been temporarily extended by Congress but its future is still in doubt. This essential tool for preventing the employment of illegal aliens should be made permanent and mandatory, especially at a time when close to 16 million Americans and legal residents are out of work.
• Implement 287[g] nationwide. The federal government must provide state and local law enforcement with the training and access to databases to coordinate and leverage existing law enforcement assets to identify and deport illegal aliens who are committing crimes that have killed or injured tens of thousands of Americans.
• Enact state and local laws to discourage illegal settlement. Eliminate sanctuary cities and other benefits that reward illegal aliens and legitimize their presence.
• Streamline judicial processing and adjudication of immigration cases.
In the 1986 amnesty legislation, we tried amnesty without enforcement. It’s time to try enforcement without amnesty.
“As you know, Arizona recently passed the toughest anti-immigration bill in American history. The idea behind this bill is to drive illegal immigrants out of Arizona and back to their homeland of Los Angeles.” –Jay Leno
“I called the governor’s office in Arizona today, and the recorded message said press one for English, press two for English, press three for English.” –Jay Leno
“Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed the nation’s toughest anti-immigration bill into law. It’s unbelievable. It makes it a crime as a state law to be in the country illegally. It lets police question anyone about their status. You know what this means? Rich people in Arizona may have to start raising their own children now.” —Jay Leno
“Arizona has passed the strictest immigration bill in American history. A hundred people have been stopped already — and that was just in one van.” –Jay Leno
“Over the weekend, tens of thousands of illegal immigrants rallied across the country demanding a path to citizenship. Don’t we already have a path to citizenship? It’s called the San Diego Freeway.” —Jay Leno
Jeff Flake needs to lose his job. We need to find out who is backing him and go after them for breaking the laws.
In a nutshell he said we need “better” immigration laws, it’s unreasonable to expect deportation of 11 million people, go after employers, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH!
STFU 0!
I’m with you. It’s simply too revolting, disgusting, nauseating...you get my drift. It’s bad enough reading it.
Heh. He's hypnotizing himself with that sing-song cadence.
Obama is noting more than a Charlie McCarthy in a skin-suit/bone-bag. A dummy.
He disgusts me to the very core of my being! I despise him.
“Have you plugged the hole yet daddy?”
I wish he would plug the hole in his face.
A sock monkey.
"I'm ready - the American people are ready - but those Repulicans are standing in the way & it can't pass without bipartisan suppor."
Boy - he's trying to pull on the heart strings, but he's boring as hell!!
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.