Posted on 11/10/2004 1:43:54 AM PST by ovrtaxt
President Bush yesterday moved aggressively to resurrect his plan to relax rules against illegal immigration, a move bound to anger conservatives just days after they helped re-elect him.
The president met privately in the Oval Office with Sen. John McCain to discuss jump-starting a stalled White House initiative that would grant legal status to millions of immigrants who broke the law to enter the United States.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Sorry, WRhine, that was directed to "chronic_loser" and not you.
After you've seen your own people crowded out and violently bullied out of neighborhoods, trades, public schools, and in some cases whole cities -- by hostile alien invaders who hate you and your kind -- you'll cease caring about whether the solution is "humane" towards them -- you'll want to stop them by whatever it takes.
Supreme court nominations, and that is the ONLY reason.
Well put.
I'm with you there. This problem didn't occur overnight, nor will the solution happen that way either.
I think jpsb has the right idea. It's not about "immigration," it's the "anti-American" sentiment of not wanting to assimilate, that sometimes comes along with it. And it's not just limited to Mexicans, as anyone who lives in So. Cal can attest.
(anyone live in or near Glendale, CA? you know what I mean...)
Until enough people recognize this, I don't see things changing in the near future.
Slap your constituents in the face as soon as possible!
R U Krazy? Like a Mexican Fox.
SCHIEFFER: Let's go to a new question, Mr. President.
I got more e-mail this week on this question than any other question. And it is about immigration.
I'm told that at least 8,000 people cross our borders illegally every day. Some people believe this is a security issue, as you know. Some believe it's an economic issue. Some see it as a human-rights issue.
How do you see it? And what do we need to do about it?
BUSH: I see it as a serious problem. I see it as a security issue, I see it as an economic issue, and I see it as a human-rights issue.
We're increasing the border security of the United States. We've got 1,000 more Border Patrol agents on the southern border.
We're using new equipment. We're using unmanned vehicles to spot people coming across.
And we'll continue to do so over the next four years. It's a subject I'm very familiar with. After all, I was a border governor for a while.
Many people are coming to this country for economic reasons. They're coming here to work. If you can make 50 cents in the heart of Mexico, for example, or make $5 here in America, $5. 15, you're going to come here if you're worth your salt, if you want to put food on the table for your families. And that's what's happening.
And so in order to take pressure off the borders, in order to make the borders more secure, I believe there ought to be a temporary worker card that allows a willing worker and a willing employer to mate up, so long as there's not an American willing to do that job, to join up in order to be able to fulfill the employers' needs.
That has the benefit of making sure our employers aren't breaking the law as they try to fill their workforce needs. It makes sure that the people coming across the border are humanely treated, that they're not kept in the shadows of our society, that they're able to go back and forth to see their families. See, the card, it'll have a period of time attached to it.
It also means it takes pressure off the border. If somebody is coming here to work with a card, it means they're not going to have to sneak across the border. It means our border patrol will be more likely to be able to focus on doing their job.
Now, it's very important for our citizens to also know that I don't believe we ought to have amnesty. I don't think we ought to reward illegal behavior. There are plenty of people standing in line to become a citizen. And we ought not to crowd these people ahead of them in line.
If they want to become a citizen, they can stand in line, too.
And here is where my opponent and I differ. In September 2003, he supported amnesty for illegal aliens.
SCHIEFFER: Time's up.
Not true, the way to control it is to issue a national citizenship card and punish employers of illegals. If the jobs dry up the illegals will too.
Honesty check time. I know, I know, it's unpleasant, but it needs to be done.
Not a single one of us is going to do a damn thing about it.
Yeah, yeah, we'll write some nasty emails to legislators and make a few phone calls and come here and jump up and down and debate it ... but we all no nothing will come of it.
We'll keep pulling the lever for "the lessor of two evils" and the borders will remain open pretty much indefintely.
Time for a gut check, fellas. It's fun to vent every now and then, but none of us are going to do more than just that. Vent.
Jpsb, you do have me thinking, but I still don't think we have much to fear from Mexicans. Most of them just want to feed their families. A similar mass of Syrians flooding into the US would worry me far more.
The biggest problem I have with imigration is that they don't make an honest effort to stem the tide of immigrants from mexico. That's what makes the amnesty so incredibly hard to chew. I'm saying we need to chew it though, for the sake of the republican party and its historically small percentage of minority membership. Rigth now, republicans should be going into these immigrant communities and preaching their positions on things, educating, etc. Because when, not if, they become a huge voting block you'll want them both informed and protective of their new country.
Bush is faithful to his word and he has many mexican constituents that helped make him Governor of Texas and played a small role in his bid for the Presidency. I loathe his stance on immigration but I admire him for being true to his word. Fight this in Congress but this president will not, unfortunately, be tough on immigration. Particularly from Mexico.
"Never met a Mexican until I was 21?". Then a rant about how great illegal immigration is? I dunno man, that's a hard case to make.
It's like me complaining about PMS. The chicks wouldn't buy it.>>
Nicely put. I have to smile even as I am being skewered on that one.
My argument is not for "illegal immigration."
My argument is for controlled borders with free ingress for persons who have no history of criminal record and who are willing to work at available jobs. Sort of the same as Bush. The fact that illegals have been here gainfully employed for years is an argument for letting them become legal. And yes, driving without license or without insurance should be cause for deportation...., to a CONTROLLED border. It is not that I believe in open borders. It is that we have a phenomenally hypocritical system which encourages illegal immigration because we know that our system rests on the cheap labor.
I further agree I had NO knowledge of Latinos as a kid.
However, I am now almost 50 years old. I hitchiked through Latin and South America (many years ago, now), lived in South America for seven months, and lived and worked in two border states (lived in Texas, worked on contract in CA, back when I was an engineer).
Unlike the crap I heard as a young boy then of "I have MANY black friends, but....." I really DO know, befriend, and help latinos assimilate into society here (I interrupted this harangue to help a guy on a traffic issue). My first hand experience with Latinos does not consist of checking the local papers and clucking in disgust as I check off the names of Hernandez, Gomez and Sanchez reading the police blotter, or driving with my windows rolled up and my Ruger on the seat beside me rolling through the slum areas of downtown. My experience is FIRST HAND and my informed opionon is that they are good people by and large.
If there is venom (and there is some) it is not directed at people who simply argue that we should not control our borders. I agree wholeheartedly with that. Nor is it that I disagree that undocumenteds should not have access to social programs. They should not (again, I don't even agree that CITIZENS have a right to those programs but that is another rant). I just fail to see how good and productive plebes should not have citizenship available, when the problem is not so much them BEING here as HOW they got here. Most of the ones I know came here illegally because we have draconian immigration laws. They simply could not feed their families and necessity trumped border laws.
You know, I was thinking the same thing when the Mexican guy I asked quit drinking on my front porch told me "You just f***ked up! I'm going to come back and F***k you up!" (It's amazing at the English they do learn).
He then stumbled away in a drunken stupor.
I was angry at first, then realized that he was just trying to feed his family by threatening me. Heck, he was just doing the threatening that Americans threateners were too lazy to do.
And it passed with 56% of the vote, despite bipartisan opposition from Napolitano, McCain, Flake, and Kolbe.
I don't have President Bush's numbers for Arizona, but I think they were within a few points of 56%. It's probably a safe bet that many of the folks who voted for President Bush also voted for Proposition #200.
What's pushing him is, 1) he has Hispanics in his family, 2) he speaks Spanish, and 3) he's a friend of Vincente Fox.
I've read all the replies to your post....but I've not seen any rebuttal from you.
What say's you!?!?!
FWIW-
The Bush adminstration is not going to get behind punishing businesses. Where do you think major doanti0ons come from?
I'm against this too....but is this any different than what Reagan did? (I don't know the answer....that's why I'm asking)
Okay, fair enough. But if they have crossed into the country illegally, driven illegally, driven without insurance, or obtained employment illegally - then they fail ever your own litmus test for legal residency.
It was a campaign promise without meaning in English.
To legalize illegal aliens for a fee by making them guest workers without requiring them to apply from their nation of origin is to reward them for breaking the law. The Bush proposal, if passed, would do exactly that.
Most of the ones I know came here illegally because we have draconian immigration laws. They simply could not feed their families and necessity trumped border laws.
Using your logic, we should let anyone into the USA who can earn more than in their home country. Think it through a little farther please, do you want everyone into the US that wants to come or should Mexicans because of their geographic proximity be the only ones?
How are things going to change in the home country if there is no pressure applied to it to change? Its like the sanctions on Iraq, without the corruption Iraq would have bowed to pressure, but didn't because those in power still had the money, peasants be darned...
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.