Public Warms to Bush Immigration Stance

Wall Street Journal ^ | 15 June 2006 | John Harwood

[mewzilla]

Send another brick.

Have to do it ourselves, though these guys have begun Phase II :)

www.send-a-brick.com

[Excellence]

"Send another brick."

Via "Air Borne" Delivery?

[Menehune56]

Many of the WSJ editorials are right on the money but they are dead-wrong on immigration. And I don't care for the way they label anyone opposed to open borders as a nativist or protectionist. Well I think of them as Country Club Republicans which is exactly what they are!

[jackieaxe]

Yah! Consider the source, the WSJ, champion of cheap labor.

[Sunshine Sister]

You got that right. Ain't no way the American public wants tens of thousands of illegals in this country.

[devane617]

This is exactly what the WS and the Washington elite are hoping for. The sheeple will eventually get tired of the story and move on. I hope that does not happen. Remember this -- Last year Parkland hospital in Dallas, TX delivered 10,500+ babies to illegals at a cost of 50+ million taxpayer dollars. That is one hospital, one city...It is coming to a town near you unless we stand united and take back our beautiful America.

[conservativecorner]

Someone let Busby know that the public is warming up to the President's illegal alien proposal. LOL! California win seen as rebuff of illegals

[conservativecorner]

See #28, and take great heart from it. The American people aren't as stupid as the elites believe.

[bybybill]

That`s the way to win,attack you friends. We will not be able to protect our borders and stop futher illegals if we won`t work with those that aren`t 100% in lock step on this issue. All this "holding our breath till we turn blue" unless we get our way is going to prevent stopping more illegals, divide our party, and elect Rats.
Time to grow up and make a deal that can work.

[Rokke]

All polls are bogus, but hopefully the anti-Bush crowd will knock off their constant chorus of "every poll shows Americans reject Bush's immigration stance." It just isn't true, and more importantly, doesn't matter when you understand how worthless polls really are.

[mr_hammer]

The WSJ has become as bad as the Dim's with their lie's and b.s.

If anything I think American's are hardened to the fact of closing the southern border... what do I know?

Signed:
Lowly Serf

[Leatherneck_MT]

hmm the unofficial polls I have been running (i.e. simply talking to people across the country) indicates exactly the opposite.

It's getting worse for the President, not better.

[Unicorn]

Immigration + Pres. Bush= bullshit.

[SmoothTalker]

Lies from the elitist WSJ. They want cheap labor and cheap household help.

[Wallace T.]

No plan can be acceptable unless it effectively seals the Mexican border, so that the Border Patrol can apprehend and return at least 90% of illegal crossers. The second phase is to create sufficient incentives to cause a large portion of the existing illegal population to return to their home countries. The guest worker program does not do that, nor do the proposals to have existing illegals pay a fine. Many of the illegals paid money to "coyotes" to enter the country in the first place. A fine is just another overhead cost that enables the illegal to earn $10-12 an hour in the construction trade, vs. $1-2 in Mexico or even less in the rest of Latin America.

Any program that places the existing 12-20 million illegals on a path to citizenship will have the effect of electing Democrats. Hispanics, Cubans excepted, vote heavily Democratic because the party promises more and better welfare and social services benefits. If most of the 12-20 million illegals become citizens, we are looking at possibly 6-10 million voters who will be reliably (80%+) Democrats. The effect on domestic politics will be enormous. It will ensure Democratic dominance of Congress for decades and Democrats in the White House, in effect the same configuration that led to the New Deal and the Great Society.

Consider as well that one of the effects of the 1986 amnesty was the leftward movement of California politics. Prior to 1992, California was a bellwether of American politics, with the state producing numerous Republican leaders like William Knowland, Richard Nixon, S.I. Hayakawa, and Ronald Reagan. The effect of naturalized Hispanics into the California electorate moved California politics to the left, possibly irreversibly. In the last two Presidential elections, the GOP wrote off the Golden State as a lost cause. Consider that we are dealing with larger numbers in 2006 (12-20 million) vs. the number in 1986 (3 million). It is not inconceivable that Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, Texas, Florida, and even Oklahoma and Georgia may move to the left by 2020 given the impact of newly enfranchised former illegals.

The bottom line is that the RINOs, the Bushbots, and the open borders advocates are the ones who would consign the Republican Party to permanent minority status. This is one issue where compromise is not an option.

[RKV]

After the Simpson-Mazzoli (sp?) fiasco during the Reagan administration, we want an emphasis on enforcement, rather than amnesty. By the way, we do have an existing program for guest workers don't we?