Want Mass Amnesty? Vote for Democrats

HUMAN EVENTS ^ | Oct 02, 2006 | James R. Edwards, Jr.

[neverdem]

The only thing standing between the country and mass amnesty is the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives.

Yet, the House is the body of the federal government most in danger of falling to Democrat control this year.

Political analyst Charlie Cook now has about 35 House Republicans in serious races. Democrats need a net gain of less than half of those seats to win control.

Disaster for the U.S.

For Republicans to lose control of the House in the fall elections would mark a disaster for America. House and Senate Democrats, some Senate Republicans, and the Bush Administration will then be able to force alien legalization on America—four times greater than the supposedly one-time-only mass amnesty of 1986.

Understandably, many voters feel frustration over the failure to act to control runaway immigration. Republicans control both houses of Congress and the White House, they reason, so why hasn’t the border been secured? Why has legal immigration continued apace? Why haven’t the immigration laws on the books been faithfully enforced?

The reason: Republicans agree that immigration presents problems, but there’s no agreement on the solutions.

Bottom line, as in medicine, policymakers should first do no harm. Thanks to the House GOP, harmful policy has been stalled.

As pathetic as President Bush’s approval rating is (deservedly on immigration issues), the public approves of Congress’s job performance even less. And immigration has continued to rise as a top-priority issue, poll after poll shows. Conservatives name immigration as the chief issue facing the country in a GOPUSA poll—cited by half of respondents, from a list of 19 issues.

While the House passed a strong enforcement-only bill last year, many senators proved themselves out of touch with political reality. This spring, the Senate passed a bill pushing mass amnesty, a guest-worker program bringing in hundreds of thousands more cheap foreign laborers and a near-tripling of already-too-high legal immigration levels.

Some Republican apostates favor amnesty. They call it “guest-worker” or “comprehensive reform” or some other euphemism. Disappointingly, otherwise conservative Rep. Mike Pence (R.-Ind.) has been hawking an amnesty/guest-worker plan almost as bad as the Senate bill.

The Bush Administration has wasted five years combing the dictionary and finding new words to distort and redefine as amnesty—while doing precious little to enforce the laws on the books.

But the fact is that a majority of GOP senators and the overwhelming majority of House Republicans faithfully oppose amnesty—no matter what it’s labeled. The House’s immigration enforcement bill (H.R. 4437) passed with 203 GOP votes. Only 36 House Democrats voted for tough enforcement, and just 17 Republicans opposed it.

A majority of Senate Republicans opposed the amnesty/guest-worker bill (S. 2611), while 23 GOP senators voted for it. Only four Democrat Senators cast “no” votes.

Enforcement Held Hostage

So why hasn’t Congress enacted a tough immigration bill yet? Because the pro-amnesty senators and White House have held hostage the enforcement measures that are widely agreed upon. These apostate Republicans (and Teddy Kennedy’s clones across the aisle) have refused to follow the most reasonable, rational route widely advocated by House Republicans: enforcement-only, first and foremost.

The House GOP has stood firm against the intense pressure of the open-borders crowd, both in and out of government. House hearings this summer served to highlight the terrible, injurious measures the White House and Senate are pushing. Alone, House Republicans have dug in.

Only now have Senate GOP leaders come to the right side of the issue. Their last-second efforts have tried to move some modest House measures such as a border fence and alien gang deportation.

If voters abandon House Republicans come Election Day, amnesty advocates will claim victory. They’ll allege the enforcement-only strategy backfired on the House GOP. They’ll claim the American public really wants millions more foreigners flooding the country, bringing in distant relatives, undercutting American wages and getting taxpayer-funded health care, education, welfare and the like.

If Democrats win control, that means their most liberal members will chair committees, set the legislative agenda, stack hearings with liberal “witnesses,” micromanage the economy, overregulate business, raise taxes, spend red ink, undo the Reagan-Republican Revolution, use “oversight” as a weapon and cozy up to business lobbyists who, at the end of the day, are “friends” and bankrollers of whoever is in charge in Washington.

The country’s future rests in the balance this election. If someone cares about the problems of mass immigration, cheap foreign labor, the threat of amnesty and having Spanish forced down America’s throat, then he must keep the U.S. House Republican.

[neverdem]

>The Hispanic Challenge (To America) A MUST READ Samuel Huntington (Long But Good)

The Mexicans are unlike previous immigrants. This Huntington article definitely needs to be read by everyone at least once! It should be linked on pertinent immigration threads. Here's an interesting link about Samuel Huntington:

"Strangely enough, despite the fact that he was buddies with Henry Kissinger at Harvard, he is registered as a member of the Democratic Party, and has written foreign policy speeches for Adlai Stevenson, Hubert Humphrey, and Jimmy Carter."

THREATS AND RESPONSES: LEGISLATION; SENATE VOTES, 90-9, TO SET UP A HOMELAND SECURITY DEPT. GEARED TO FIGHT TERRORISM

Senator Phil Gramm of Texas, the president's chief Senate supporter in changing the Civil Service protections in the bill, acknowledged that Democrats had written 95 percent of the bill and acknowledged the paradoxical role of small-government Republicans like him in advocating for such a large department.

And which party is now making it useless?

Bush: Democrat killed immigration bill

In private as well as public, Reid and Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., who heads the party's campaign effort, said they did not want to expose rank-and-file Democrats to votes that would force them to choose between border security and immigrant rights, only to wind up with legislation that would be eviscerated in future negotiations with the House, which has passed a bill limited to boosting border security.

Harry Reid: now and then

Path to Deportation Can Start With a Traffic Stop

[FairOpinion]

Exactly.

Those who stay home because they are upset with the Republicans, or vote third party, are helping the Dems take control.

A Republican strategist was on FoxNews today, and he said that they way the Dems can take control of the House is if the conservatives stay home.

[stephenjohnbanker]

What is your point?

[stephenjohnbanker]

"A Republican strategist was on FoxNews today, and he said that they way the Dems can take control of the House is if the conservatives stay home."

We won't stay home, clown! We will vote republican because they are ever so slightly less odious than Pro reconquista Bush. You win, the rest of us lose!

[stephenjohnbanker]

More odious, that is. Bush makes my blood boil!

Press 1 for english!

[FairOpinion]

"We won't stay home, clown! We will vote republican "


I am certainly glad to hear that!

I hear way too many "cut off your nose to spite your face" types, who want to "show the Republicans" by electing the Dems who stand for everything they oppose. The "logic" escapes me.

[FairOpinion]

Now you confused me.

Are you or are you not going to vote for Republicans?

As for your being upset with President Bush, you need to look at the whole picture -- without him, you and I and a lot of others may well be dead by now, murdered by the terrorists.

[CottonBall]

Those who stay home because they are upset with the Republicans, or vote third party, are helping the Dems take control.

Or perhaps the Senate Republicans and WH should blame themselves for not listening to what their base wanted. The faxes, emails, and bricks should've been a clue. "I'm the lesser of 2 evils" isn't exactly a motivating campaign slogan.

But I do agree that our House has acted magnificently and HR4437 was the best piece of legislation voted on in a long time. Even if the Senate completely disregarded it. The House is the only thing standing between us and what the WH and some Senators tried to shove down our throats. Kudos to them and we need most of them back.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Yes, I am going to vote Republican, as I have no choice. Our borders have been WIDE OPEN for 6 years. Does that bother you just a bit?

[CottonBall]

As for your being upset with President Bush, you need to look at the whole picture -- without him, you and I and a lot of others may well be dead by now, murdered by the terrorists.

How about those murdered by illegal aliens? Or raped? Or burglarized? Or had their SSN stolen?

[FairOpinion]

The illegal immigration problem has been going on for 30 years, you can't expect President Bush to wave a magic wand and solve it, especially since he has been a bit busy with the War on Terror, in case you haven't noticed.

[FairOpinion]

Also, President Bush did do several things, he increased b order patrol, stopped the "catch and release program", is using more technology to detect border crossers. It just can't be done all at once.

You should give him credit for what he has accomplished.

[FairOpinion]

What you seem to be ignoring is that the main reason a lot more didn't get done, was because of the DEMOCRATS are obstructing everything. The solution is to elect more Republicans, not to throw control of Congress over to the Dems who are the real cause of the problems.

[CottonBall]

The illegal immigration problem has been going on for 30 years, you can't expect President Bush to wave a magic wand and solve it, especially since he has been a bit busy with the War on Terror, in case you haven't noticed.

Yes, he inherited the problem. But he not only didn't address it, he exacerbated it by talking about amnesty and being buddy-buddy with Fox. And a war on terror cannot be fought with a porous southern border. We have millions of unknowns - some potentially terrorists - streaming across every year. And we have billions of unknowns living among us. Fighting the WOT abroad AND securing the nation should've gone hand-in-hand.

[FairOpinion]

Feds Deport 875 Criminal Aliens from 5 States

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/18573.html

Detention and removal officers from the Homeland Security Department deported 875 criminal aliens in August to their respective countries of origin. Those departed had varied criminal histories that included rape, assaults, attempted murder, and other crimes.


All of those deported were detained in ICE facilities in a five-state area that included Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas and Tennessee.

[FairOpinion]

More than 2,100 criminal aliens, gangbangers, fugitives nailed by feds


http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/kouri/060614


===

Why aren't you giving credit for what the Feds have been doing?

[CottonBall]

Also, President Bush did do several things, he increased b order patrol, stopped the "catch and release program", is using more technology to detect border crossers. It just can't be done all at once.

You forgot that his promises of amnesty had even more crossing the border - according to many BP sources. And that workplace arrests under his administration trickled down to less than those even under Clinton.

[CottonBall]

What you seem to be ignoring is that the main reason a lot more didn't get done, was because of the DEMOCRATS are obstructing everything. The solution is to elect more Republicans, not to throw control of Congress over to the Dems who are the real cause of the problems.

I'll agree to that as long as it's the right kind of Republicans. Even many Democrats in the House voted for HR4437 - they didn't obstruct anything in that chamber. And many Republicans in the Senate voted for amnesty - at the WH's urging. So we can't blame this on the Democrats. We had a Republican controlled House, a Republican controlled Senate, and a Republican controlled WH. And HR4437 didn't see the light of day in the Senate, but amnesty sure did. Some Republicans are worse because they run as conservatives, but vote as liberals. I wouldn't trust a Democrat - you're correct on that. But, sometimes it's hard to know if we can trust a Republican to act like one. That'll demotivate the base to come out more than anything else this election.

[FairOpinion]

YOu have to get your priorities straight: first elect enough Republicans, so the Dems can't obstruct, THEN you elect a few more Republicans for margin, THEN you can go after the RINOs. But replacing RINOS with Democrats only helps the Dems and hurts the conservative cause in every respect.

[stephenjohnbanker]

"Also, President Bush did do several things, he increased b order patrol, stopped the "catch and release program", is ....

Increased the border patrol to 8 % of our needs : )

Catch & Release is alive and well. When Bush had 1500 illegals arrested last month, all were set free. Get a CLUE!