Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why the Railroad Effort on the Amnesty Bill?
Jawa Report ^ | June 16, 2007 | Ragnar Danneskjold

Posted on 06/16/2007 8:02:53 AM PDT by 3AngelaD

We can all understand the push by big business to keep their steady flow of illegal laborers coming in, strengthening their bargaining position against blue-collar working class Americans. Then again, they already have that today in droves. Why the sudden balls-to-the-wall push to get it all "kosher" right now? Mickey Kaus forwards a theory:

Chertoff and Kyl both seem to have answered that question recently, Kyl in his Wall Street Journal interview and Chertoff on Fox News yesterday: because businesses are starting to worry about efforts to enforce immigration laws at the local level. One state in the vanguard of that effort is Kyl's (and McCain's) home state of Arizona, where the legislature has passed numerous laws (usually vetoed) on the issue, and where the public voted for Prop 200 back in 2004.

To me that says something far more ominous than that Congress is being disingenuous or naïve on the matter. Far from simple being empty promises, this amnesty bill is actually a blatant attempt to head off any attempts at enforcement at all.

I think this is probably right. I think big business realizes that voters are going to extract some very explicit and unequivocal promises from their candidates next year. I think they realize at this point that a number of their champions on this bill are not coming back to Washington after the next election.

Big agriculture and big construction realize that they'll be faced with a new Commander-in-Chief, Democrat or Republican, who will likely have made a list of unequivocal promises to the voters during the campaign. Given the opportunity to build up public goodwill with a series of big, high-profile immigration busts in her first six months of office, does anyone think that President Hillary would pass it up? If she's anywhere near as calculating as her reputation suggests, there's not a chance she'll pass up that opportunity.

A Republican President would feel less need for high-profile token efforts, but may bring in a Justice Department that actually cares about national security. (How crazy would that be?) If you're an employer who's been skirting the law for years with a wink and a nod, this change in the winds has to be keeping you up at night--with good reason. Some CEOs looking at public opinion polls and knowing their employment rolls haven't been even close to right with God, have to be dealing with some serious heartburn at the thought of angry villagers at the corporate gates demanding massive fines and/or a few years in federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

If the employers can just get across the line on this, they've significantly reduced their exposure. This Amnesty Bill represents a sort of "get out of jail free" card for these executives. Whether it'll actually work out that way is another matter. They see the writing on the wall, and they're pulling out the stops to protect their own hides, even if they have to wreck their own country to do it. Of course, jamming this piece of sh*** down our throats only adds to the long list of reasons we're already pissed as hell at the employers and their elected cronies.

This may be your time, fellas. You may have the upper hand now. The men in power are your boys, and you may get them to vote how you like, even against the clear will of the people who sent them there. Enjoy it while it lasts, but don't forget it for a second: our time is coming. You have the cash, but we have the numbers. A whole lot of us have damn long memories. We're gonna remember every bit of this sordid ordeal. And payback, as they say, is a bitch.


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: aliens; amnesty; cheaplabor; illegals; immigrantlist; immigration; noamnestyforillegals; pitchforkpat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-209 next last
Makes sense to me.
1 posted on 06/16/2007 8:02:56 AM PDT by 3AngelaD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

http://www.eeevilconservative.com/archives/2007/06/the_north_american_union_is_a.html


2 posted on 06/16/2007 8:05:17 AM PDT by eeevil conservative (UNASHAMEDLY AMERICAN MADE and an AMERICA LOVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

"Ted, your 'Amnesty, Disease and Felon Importation Act of 2007' to Chappaquidick America was brilliant.
But your latest idea of using HAMAS from Gaza to replace TSA Inspectors is truly inspired."

3 posted on 06/16/2007 8:07:11 AM PDT by Diogenesis (Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diogenesis

I love that picture of the terrorist on the airport xray. Coming to an airport in your country soon...


4 posted on 06/16/2007 8:08:39 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Yeah, it does. Before the free traitors flood us, let me say that the Constitution does not personally gaurantee making a single person or business wealthy.
5 posted on 06/16/2007 8:10:43 AM PDT by Ukiapah Heep (Shoes for Industry!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD; Guenevere
It finally crystalized for me last night. If they don't get this through now, before the next election cycle, they can't get their North American Union and Trans-Texas corridor (or whatever that thing is called). They need Bush to lead that movement - because he's a lame duck, and everyone else is afraid for their political head. Above all, the borders MUST remain wide open in order for this plan to come to fruition.

All the talk about the importance of "the Hispanic vote," and even about business wanting a slave class (which indeed may be true), is secondary...it's the NAU promise that is driving this insanity.

JMO...but by George, I think I've got it.

6 posted on 06/16/2007 8:12:49 AM PDT by truthkeeper (It's the borders, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Unfortunately, it is not the only thing coming.

Part 1

RESULT:
Part 2:


7 posted on 06/16/2007 8:14:37 AM PDT by Diogenesis (Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

I think it has more to do with the CFR push to integrate Canada/USA/Mexico into one political unit.


8 posted on 06/16/2007 8:15:17 AM PDT by OK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Statue of Amnesty!
9 posted on 06/16/2007 8:18:45 AM PDT by Sybeck1 (Recall Lott)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

I just think our elected officials have been making a lot of self serving dirty deals with business interests and foreign governments. They laid down with dogs, woke up with fleas, and expect us to itch for them.

I say they’re on their own when it comes to explaining breaking deals that we the people didn’t approve. They made their bed and they can lay in it.


10 posted on 06/16/2007 8:20:55 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Greed is NOT a conservative ideal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OK

The two goals are not all that mutually exclusive.


11 posted on 06/16/2007 8:24:45 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Why now? Because neither Republican voters nor Democrat voters want it. Opposition to the bill is in the neighborhood of 80%, which probably includes most blacks, union workers, and even legal Hispanics.

A Republican president was unable to get amnesty through a Republican congress. A Democrat president, supposing hillary is elected next year, will be unable to get it past the labor unions and the blacks without mortally offending them. Each party needs the other to blame the fallout on.

That’s why Harry Reid insisted that this is Bush’s bill, and why Bush needs Teddy Kennedy to take charge of it.

Ironically, IF WE MANAGE TO SHOOT THIS ABOMINATION DOWN, the businesses that hire illegals will be screwed, because the people are waking up to what is being done. Whether the Democrats or the Republicans win in 2008, they will be pushed very hard to enforce the law. So they need to make all these people legal NOW.

It’s now or never for both sides. Call your senators and everyone else who has any influence on this, including local politicians and newspapers.


12 posted on 06/16/2007 8:24:54 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper
I believe that you are correct. There is a report due this Fall from the "Security & Prosperity Partnership org that will likely cause a move in further integrate Mexico & Canada with the US. The Washington DC establishment wants this all done and behind us before the '08 election really revs up.

www.spp.gov

13 posted on 06/16/2007 8:26:16 AM PDT by Paladin2 (Islam is the religion of violins, NOT peas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

“... the businesses that hire illegals will be screwed...” because it will harder to force us to subsidize their cheap labor.


14 posted on 06/16/2007 8:27:23 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: OK

I think at the highest political levels, i.e., the Bushes, Clintons, certain Senators, and the oligarchy of Mexico it is about creating MexAmeriCanada. Beneath that level, there is an unholy convergence of interests driving this. Business and agriculture want an endless, cheap, easily exploitable source of labor. Both political parties think they’re getting voters, although by and large only the Dems are correct about that. A few bleeding hearts think it’s the nice, compassionate thing to do. A few other misguided souls think this is the way to save Social Security. A few complete and total idiots on Capitol Hill think this is McCain’s path to the Presidency. Pro-Hispanic racist groups want many more Hispanics in this country to expand their power base.

And us poor citizens and legal immigrants just want to keep our security and sovereignty.


15 posted on 06/16/2007 8:27:49 AM PDT by LadyNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
There are several agendas tangled up in this legislation, none of which are beneficial to the average American and all of which have been obfusicated, lied about, and kept hidden from the American people. I'm beginning to suspect that there is a timetable attached to this as well.

For Republican congressmen to risk the elimination of their party the way they are tells me that there is a mindset and an agenda among these people, of both parties, that has taken into account the reality of a new, one-party system in this country if this bill becomes law and the apparent approval of that new system by the entire political class.

I just think that there are too many missing pieces to this puzzle. I know we are not being told everything, I know that if this bill was legitimate there wouldn't be the rush to pass it, there wouldn't be the cloak-and-dagger, underhanded deal-making, and there wouldn't be the President of the United States, in a fit of sanctimonious anger, calling opponents of this monstrosity racist and xenophobic. There is something about this so important to these people that they are willing to do anything to get this enshrined into law.

16 posted on 06/16/2007 8:28:42 AM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Makes sense to me.

Hmmm. So it all makes sense, except that it doesn't.

The posit here is that "amnesty" is really not directed at the mex's themselves, but amnesty for big-biz to protect them for when the ultra-antibiz Hillary sweeps all these pro-amnesty congressmen out of office in 2008.

Which, of course, means that Prez-2008 will have the oppty to crack down on illegal-supporting big-businesses even more. Give 30Million mex's amnesty, and there will always be another wave of subsequent illegals to prosecute over.

Supposing Jawa is correct, then he undercuts his own premise right there.

If you're an illegal hiring big-biz owner, then you DO NOT want an amnesty bill. Amnesty gives your existing cheap labor rights to min wage etc. And Amnesty doesn't indemnify you from the Hillary Federal Govt coming down on you in 2009, it makes it worse.

If you're an illegal hiring big-biz owner, you want to keep illegals illegal and cheap, and you want to keep your protectors in congressional seats continuously.

A law cannot protect you because it can be overturned at any given time.

17 posted on 06/16/2007 8:30:02 AM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

The headline is a good question. The body of the essay may be ignored. There is a severe lack of explaining going on in DC. They may be in the phase where Marie Antoinette commented on the lack of bread.


18 posted on 06/16/2007 8:30:29 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper

I also think you’re right.


19 posted on 06/16/2007 8:30:40 AM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
God forgive me, but I've been harboring thoughts along the lines of "too bad that one of those planes didn't hit the Capitol on 9/11".

Sadly, 9/11 is a distant memory for most Democrats, and most Beltway politicians. How else does one explain the unwillingness to enforce our borders?

20 posted on 06/16/2007 8:30:41 AM PDT by Night Hides Not (Chuck Hagel makes Joe Biden look like a statesman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Night Hides Not

The link between massive illegal immigration and terror by Arabs is weak. Twenty or thirty million illegal alien Mexicans wandering around is the problem. But, why is that a problem? and terror isn’t it.


21 posted on 06/16/2007 8:35:28 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: sam_paine

Except that the bill ensures the status quo of continued taxpayer subsidies for the employees of the businesses employing illegals, in fact, it writes such subsidies into law.


22 posted on 06/16/2007 8:35:53 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
They may be in the phase where Marie Antoinette commented on the lack of bread.

Without a doubt.

23 posted on 06/16/2007 8:36:55 AM PDT by truthkeeper (It's the borders, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta
Yeah, it takes me a while...I'm a lowly English major and not too into business and economics (except for basic stuff), but sheesh...even a blind squirrel can find a nut occasionally.

And this particular nut is getting pretty damn big.

24 posted on 06/16/2007 8:40:00 AM PDT by truthkeeper (It's the borders, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Most of us don't know what is in this bill. We only know that the Democrats want to pass it. That alone should be enough to make any American wary.

The invasion of illegal aliens across the Mexican border amounts to a massive demographic population shift. Our own government is not only encouraging this invasion but will do nothing to protect America against its ravages.

The solution is simple:

1. begin immediately to deport all illegal aliens as they can be caught and apprehended.

2. Impose heavy fines against anyone, person or business, who aids and abets the crime of illegal immigration.

3. Deny any Social Security or Welfare State benefits to non-citizens of whatever national origin.

4. Build a sufficient barrier along the border to keep illegal aliens out of the country.

5. Enforce all immigration laws now in effect.

6. Issue an ID card to all non-citizen.

7. Halt all immigration for 75 years.

8. Allow a time limit guest worker program with proper registration and monitoring systems.

BTW, it’s not true that illegal aliens take jobs Americans will not take. It is true that Americans will not work for the low wages illegal aliens will work for.

25 posted on 06/16/2007 8:40:25 AM PDT by R.W.Ratikal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper

Yes, you nailed it. Everything is supposed to be up and functioning by 2010, so this is their opportunity if the trains are going to run on time.


26 posted on 06/16/2007 8:43:14 AM PDT by penowa (NO more Bushes; NO more Clintons EVER!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
I love that picture of the terrorist on the airport xray.

That pic sure says it all.

Nam Vet

27 posted on 06/16/2007 8:43:21 AM PDT by Nam Vet (Timely reporting from Attila's right flank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: R.W.Ratikal
6. Issue an ID card to all non-citizen.

Simple?

Ihre Papieren, Bitte!

Don't have papers.

Oh, in that case you're okay. Go ahead.

28 posted on 06/16/2007 8:43:43 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Maybe Bush is looking at the big picture and taking a long view. A VERY long view.
Maybe Uncle George has good reason for wanting as many "Mexican-Americans" here in the USA as possible:


29 posted on 06/16/2007 8:43:48 AM PDT by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R.W.Ratikal

Speak for yourself. I read the thing, and I read the Congressional Budget office report on it, as well as Rector’s analysis. And I’ve been trying to get ahold of the amendments Dirty Harry agreed to allow to be debated next week. I agree with your solutions.


30 posted on 06/16/2007 8:48:18 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

It’s not just big business executives who want the amnesty. It’s millions of small business owners. For example, We just had our roof on an 11 year old house ripped off and replaced by “Home Depot”. Now what Home Depot and Loews for that matter hires reputable firms who do good work and charge the buyer extra for guaranteed longer life. It is a small house, 1680 Sq. Ft. on a mountain with lots of wind, but they had two crews of about 15 guys on the roof together, doing the job for in about 5 hours with a guaranttee of 50 years, translating to the next buyer if that should happen. Also, landscape crews headed by small business owners are almost totally in the gardening/landscaping business in two southern states where we do a lot of business. There’s is not question that Hispanics are very good workers and most of them undoubtedly are illegal. We have friends in the road construction/black top business. They do hire illegals, they earn a good salary. live in modern double wides with nice interiors, drive newer cars, and have their children well dressed and polite.

Cordio


31 posted on 06/16/2007 8:49:05 AM PDT by Cordio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1_Inch_Group; 2sheep; 2Trievers; 3AngelaD; 3pools; 3rdcanyon; 4Freedom; 4ourprogeny; 7.62 x 51mm; ..

ping


32 posted on 06/16/2007 8:50:11 AM PDT by gubamyster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

P is for pissant. BTW Jeb’s wife is Columba and her dad was a migrant worker. The Wikipedia entry mentions (LOL!) that neither her mother or father was Mestizo. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columba_Bush


33 posted on 06/16/2007 8:50:15 AM PDT by dennisw (The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: R.W.Ratikal
Most of us don't know what is in this bill.

What is in the bill does not matter a whit to the MOTU. Proof is in the fact that they would not even amend it to exclude criminals and scofflaws. What sane being would not vote for that?

No, I have come to the conclusion that the bill is only a MacGuffin. In a nutshell, this was Alfred Hitchcock's term for weird, obtuse turns in the plot that were completely secondary to his main goal of presenting the visual impact and suspense of his movie. Inotherwords, it was difficult to follow where the money was hidden, where the suspect worked, etc. But Lordy...you sure remembered the shower scene, or Cary Grant being cropdusted!

This bill is only a MacGuffin...it is not the goal.
The agenda is a North American Union.

34 posted on 06/16/2007 8:51:00 AM PDT by truthkeeper (It's the borders, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: OK

“I think it has more to do with the CFR push to integrate Canada/USA/Mexico into one political unit.....”

BINGO!!BINGO!! If YOU were a huge corporation...would you rather deal with a few corrupt and readily, cheaply bribed
Mexican-type federale official....or a US congresscritter....


35 posted on 06/16/2007 8:51:46 AM PDT by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Cordio

I resent paying taxes to subsidize the employees of small business owners as much as I resent paying taxes to subsidize the employees of big businesses.


36 posted on 06/16/2007 8:54:43 AM PDT by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: mo
...would you rather deal with a few corrupt and readily, cheaply bribed Mexican-type federale official....or a US congresscritter...

Neighbor, I believe you are repeating yourself...

37 posted on 06/16/2007 8:55:28 AM PDT by backhoe (-30-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

That’s exactly right.

George Bush has had a hidden agenda, on so many fronts, since before he was President.

He is manipulative, disingenuous, and downright sneaky.

And he is a condescending elitist, to boot.


38 posted on 06/16/2007 8:56:07 AM PDT by SerpentDove (If it walks like a lame duck, and quacks like a lame duck, it's a lame duck.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Each party needs the other to blame the fallout on.

Excellent analysis. Quite logical and believable.

39 posted on 06/16/2007 8:56:48 AM PDT by Verloona Ti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator

To: DoctorJim

The failure to provide adequate border security really does call into question the premise of the war in Iraq, at least in my mind.


41 posted on 06/16/2007 9:00:42 AM PDT by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Except that the bill ensures the status quo....

Except that no "bill" can do any such thing. The status quo that's passed today can be quietly amended and reversed as an amendment to some other bill next session.

The author proposes that the biz-owners are rammin this through precisely because the status quo is about to change and, according to the author, they want this passed to protect them from the next Prez and Congress which will sweep away all the pro-amnesty congresscritters.

Thus if the author is correct, and their pro-amnesty protectors are swept out of congress, then the big-biz pro-illegals will be even MORE vulnerable in the next congress because their protectors will be gone, and Hillary is going to find a way to crush their balls no matter what legislation is passed this session.

The supporters of amnesty can be wrong, and also believe that it's the right thing to do at the same time.

The pro-amnesty people may just simply believe that what they are doing is the best compromise they can get before Hillary gets in and they have no say, and that doing nothing is worse.

The author's explanation here for their motivation falls short.

42 posted on 06/16/2007 9:01:01 AM PDT by sam_paine (X .................................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DoctorJim
If this bill passes they know it will be too late for the citizenry to do anything about the mexican invasion. On the other hand, if it doesn't pass when they resurrect it, it may be too late for them, and their friends, to walk away scott free after trying to destroy the face of our nation. The political fallout will be enormous for them, destroying their reputations and legacies, and this is what they fear most right now. I pray that people will continue to call, write, email and fax their representatives and the WH. NOW is the time to STOP this bill, forever.

I had to repost it, even though you just said it. It was too good. You are dead on the money.

Whatever it takes people...we've got to stop it.

43 posted on 06/16/2007 9:02:12 AM PDT by truthkeeper (It's the borders, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

Comment #44 Removed by Moderator

To: RightWhale

>>The link between massive illegal immigration and terror by Arabs is weak.<<

We don’t know how many terrorists may be sneaking in among the “gardeners and nannies.” Many of the most potentially most lethal terrorists don’t act until the time is right.

The lack of respect for the law is a big problem, and in my view is a significant security risk.


45 posted on 06/16/2007 9:06:11 AM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas (Illegals: representation without taxation--Citizens: taxation without representation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Whatever the motives, and I think they are several and diverse, Bush is absolutely willing to trash his remaining good will, fracture the social order, and lose a war that could and should be won - all in order to make it happen.

That alone should scare the bejeezus out of most Americans....this thing has been given status ahead of terrorism (it probably encourages it), ahead of the public will and social order, ahead of (either party's) unity, and ahead of the 'legacy' that other presidents have worried so much about.

Tony Snow has gone from conservative icon to banal mouthpiece in one smooth slide - and he seems content with that. Kennedy and McCain, satire for most of their time in office, have risen to lead the charge - while a president who owes neither any allegiance beats the drum for them. Those in support of this beast seem to have no second thoughts about smearing any and all discontent within their own parties and their own constituencies.

I'm scared just at the thought that it has so much intent and force behind it - and I'm really scared at the thought that politicians, theoretically depending on popular votes for their status, are driven to jam it up our collective throat.

46 posted on 06/16/2007 9:09:53 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas

The lack of respect for law is right there in ‘amnesty.’ That might mean we can pick and choose which if any laws we want to ignore, as we already do and we could make quite a list no problem. That is the danger. The security thing is a distraction: if laws mean nothing what is left?


47 posted on 06/16/2007 9:11:40 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
If laws mean nothing, what is left?

The words of St. Thomas More have been coming to my mind more and more lately:

"And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!"

48 posted on 06/16/2007 9:15:55 AM PDT by truthkeeper (It's the borders, stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Am I being naive, or should there not be some type of publication of the who’s who of the corporations attempting to get this railroaded through? Companies that are worried about losing customers over losing cheap labor might reconsider this push if they thought it might actually not benefit them in the long run. Or hopefully might damage them in the short and long term. This is getting frighteningly close.


49 posted on 06/16/2007 9:16:06 AM PDT by just mimi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthkeeper

Good one! More joked around a lot, but he was right.


50 posted on 06/16/2007 9:18:42 AM PDT by RightWhale (Repeal the Treaty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-209 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson