Bush Amnesty Sparks Surge in Border Crossings

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,111818,00.html ^ | February 19, 2004 | Matt Hayes

[VU4G10]

On Jan. 27, the Copley News Service reported that shortly after President Bush announced

[Cicero]

Predictable from the very first. I also said this would happen, because it's what happened the last time.

I still support President Bush for reelection, but this proposal was a big mistake for our country and a stupid political mistake for Bush. I hope it doesn't cost us the kind of majority in the Senate that would let Bush appoint some decent judges and make it easier for him to pursue the war on terror.

[Dane]

It is quite ironic that VU, an anti-immigrant advocate, posts an article by an immigration lawyer, whose specialty is to help immigrants stay in this country.

This was posted in Fox News's view section and they appropriately stated that Mr. Hayes was an immigration advocate, while VU4G10 left that fact out.

[Dane]

See reply #9 and the information VU4G10 left out.

[skeeter]

Let's go back to thinking that doing nothing will help.

In the context of the article, doing nothing would've been the better option.

[jeremiah]

"The FIRST job is to secure our borders" GW Bush in his SOTU address. Is he waiting for a Nuke to come across?

[rhombus]

In the context of the article, doing nothing would've been the better option.

Agreed. Nonetheless we have to do something. We are supposed to be the party that faces reality and takes action. Unfortunately there's a lot of Rats in the road ahead.

[Bikers4Bush]

Lol!

[Dane]

In the context of the article, doing nothing would've been the better option.

See reply #9, this seems to be a Kerry/Moby tactic, given the author's chosen profession.

Here's the original link to the Kerry/Moby gambit.

Punk the Prez- Moby's - anti-Bush tricks

[Dane]

Lol!

Looks like the laugh is on you. See reply #9.

[#3Fan]

Exactly.

[Dane]

See reply #8. MM and Howlin, looks like the Moby group is posting views on Fox News. That's okay but it seems that some are picking it up to give their views "conservative credibility". Of course Fox states the profession of the writer, something that VU4G10 didn't think was important.

KB, B4Bush, Skeeter and Cicero. You should be directed towards reply #8, not #9, sorry for the error.

[#3Fan]

It is quite ironic that VU, an anti-immigrant advocate, posts an article by an immigration lawyer, whose specialty is to help immigrants stay in this country. This was posted in Fox News's view section and they appropriately stated that Mr. Hayes was an immigration advocate, while VU4G10 left that fact out.

Kinda like Buchanon when he teamed up with a socialist. lol

[Howlin]

Is that the best you can come up with? Pathetic, but the DNC thanks you!

[joesnuffy]

WWKD

[Howlin]

Officers of the Border Patrol have now been directed to ask a set of questions of the illegal aliens they apprehend running across the border.

By who?

[Bikers4Bush]

How is the laugh on me if the information is true? I could care less who the messenger is, I'm concerned with the details of what is happening and if illegals are streaming across looking for the supposed amnesty we have an even bigger problem than before.

[Jim Cane]

Why?...why would the President who is waging a war on terror ...leave the back door open to these same terrorists to infiltrate....?

Because Jughead needs a reichstag event just as much as Clinton (OKC) in order to hold on to his job at this point.

[skeeter]

Agreed. Nonetheless we have to do something. We are supposed to be the party that faces reality and takes action.

We sure should. What I cannot understand is why the president's policy isn't to enforce the employers sanction provisions from the last amnesty. It is the morally correct course of action & as a side benefit would be a wildly popular move - if the polls on the subject are correct.

Then we would've avoided this entire mess with NO new programs.

[rhombus]

We sure should. What I cannot understand is why the president's policy isn't to enforce the employers sanction provisions from the last amnesty. It is the morally correct course of action & as a side benefit would be a wildly popular move - if the polls on the subject are correct.

Then we would've avoided this entire mess with NO new programs.

Yes, this would seem to make sense and the Rats wounld never object to heavy fines being levied on corporations. I find it hard to believe that they have such a strong lobbying influence. Is this the problem?

[dalebert]

I think this will lose him more votes than anything but what is the alternative?