White House Shifts on Welfare Law; Food Stamps for Legal Immigrants

New York Times ^

[codeword]

In a confused, reality impaired way you are correct.

Gee, thanks!

[codeword]

Why can't the alternative be Alan Keyes?

Keyes is too honest and too smart to ever get elected.

[Sabertooth]

President Reagan had to concede, kicking and screaming of course!, on some spending items the "rats of the day" insisted upon, in order to pass his tax-cut/defense buildup legislation.

Perhaps...GWB is reading the 'playbook' one chapter ahead of the 'rats' on this one.?

This isn't a concession, this is a White House proposal while he's riding at 80% in the polls. This is a stab in the back, and I sure hope I'm polled this week.

79, 78, 77...

[Torie]

I understand your point of view. The larger problem is encouraging immigration because of welfare magnetism, is not desirable. It is an empirical issue has to just how powerful that magnet is. But if folks are here legally, differentiating has its downside. It is divisive, and somewhat difficult to administer. And letting folks live in squalor, and the affect on their kids, while in our midst, poses problems to. Tough issue.

[anniegetyourgun]

Thanks for the ping. Looks like lots of people unhappy that this President doesn't do 100% of what they want 100% of the time. Perhaps one day they will find that candidate and he will win 100% of the time, I'm sure.

[LADY J]

"Are there Republicans in this administration? You could have fooled me. Tell me.... which ones are Repubs?"

I think they are the ones passing all the RATS pork loaded spending bills.

[Jesse]

If they're here legally what's the problem?

1) They aren't citizens.

2) If they want to be here, taxpayers should be under no obligation to support them.

3) I have enough problems with giving citizens food stamps and welfare from the government. Poverty is generally a choice. Even when it is not, feeding the institutionalized poor-by-choice or temporary poor by-circumstances would best be handled by private organizations such as churches, funded by voluntary private donations, not the government.

[WRhine]

Thanks for the ping. Looks like lots of people unhappy that this President doesn't do 100% of what they want 100% of the time. Perhaps one day they will find that candidate and he will win 100% of the time, I'm sure.

I just want this president to enforce the integrity of OUR BORDERS and to UPHOLD our immigration LAWS. Is that TOO MUCH to ASK?

[WarHawk42]

Maybe. But I think President Bush has a whole crowd of pollsters and analysts and advisors that are telling him otherwise, and he is listening.

Bush one and Bob Dole had a whole crowd (Probably a lot of the same ones) of pollsters, analysts and advisors to.........and they lost.

WarHawk42

[Sabertooth]

But if folks are here legally, differentiating has its downside. It is divisive, and somewhat difficult to administer. And letting folks live in squalor, and the affect on their kids, while in our midst, poses problems too.

If I might ask, how long ave you been in CA?

I've been here all forty years of my life, and the state is in decline. Middle class neighborhoods are in retreat in the San Fernando Valley, as elsewhere. This proposal will be yet a further magnet for more immigrants, legal and illegal, when we haven't yet assimialted the ones we have. Meantime, underclass blacks in this state are hurt most of all, by the crowd of non-citizens at the entry rungs of the economic ladder.

My suggestions: establish a guest-worker program with teeth and severe penalties (total asset forfeiture for any violation of the law), no family reunification for non-citizens, deportation of illegals, and no welfare for anyone.

[WarHawk42]

If you are a strong believer in the Constitution you are considered a terrorist by the FBI.  The only conclusion I draw from that is the federal government has strayed so far from the Constitution they fear anyone who still believes in it.

WarHawk42

[Bogey78O]

Actually the correct word is globalist. Many pople have known he was for a long time.

[codeword]

Bush one [sic] and Bob Dole had a whole crowd (Probably a lot of the same ones) of pollsters, analysts and advisors to.........and they lost.

So what? I didn't say it was going to work. Just that this is what they are doing.

[Jesse]

But I think President Bush has a whole crowd of pollsters and analysts and advisors that are telling him otherwise, and he is listening.

Yeah, I believe that Bush has a whole crowd of pollsters and analysts and advisors telling him to listen to the polls and act accordingly. It is an effective strategy to abuse power by making executive orders, spend money on new Government programs, increase federal regulations, and most importantly, get reelected.

Just ask Bill Clinton.

[WRhine]

If you are a strong believer in the Constitution you are considered a terrorist by the FBI.

This is probably true in this day of age.

[anniegetyourgun]

Who was the last President (in your lifetime) to achieve that to your satisfaction?

[Regulator]

The smell of Democrat vote buying emanating from a "Republican" White House.

Home looks like a nice place to stay and watch the next presidential election results....at least I'll know what I'm getting.

[anniegetyourgun]

Yep - Hillary!

[Sabertooth]

Thanks for the ping. Looks like lots of people unhappy that this President doesn't do 100% of what they want 100% of the time. Perhaps one day they will find that candidate and he will win 100% of the time, I'm sure.

I'm perfectly willing to cut my losses and accept the less harmful candidate in most instances. I've voted for pro-choice Republicans.

But, if America doesn't protect its borders, if America gives handouts to non-citizens for pure, craven, political calculation, what's the point?

There comes a time when one has to turn the channel, vote with one's wallet, or... withhold one's vote.

That time comes for me when the man I voted for, protested for, and took my daughter out of school one day to see, decides to lead a surrender when he's sitting at 80% in the polls.