Bush Attacks Immigration Deal Opponents

[Ryan Ruck]

Bush Attacks Immigration Deal Opponents

President Bush attacked opponents of an immigration deal Tuesday, suggesting they "don't want to do what's right for America."

"The fundamental question is, will elected officials have the courage necessary to put a comprehensive immigration plan in place," Bush said against a backdrop of a huge American flag.

He described his proposal—which has been agreed to by a bipartisan group of senators—as one that "makes it more likely we can enforce our border—and at the same time uphold the great immigrant tradition of the United States of America."

Bush spoke at the nation's largest training center for law enforcement.

He chose the get-tough setting as conservative critics blast a Senate proposal as being soft on people who break the law. Hoping to blunt that message, Bush emphasized that any new options for immigrants and foreign workers would not start until tougher security is in place.

The presidential stop came during a congressional recess, with senators back home and facing pressure from the left and right on the immigration plan. Bush's aim is to build momentum for the legislation, perhaps his best chance for a signature victory in his second term. The Senate expects to resume debate on it next week.

"A lot of Americans are skeptical about immigration reform, primarily because they don't think the government can fix the problems," Bush said.

"And my answer to the skeptics is: give us a chance to fix the problems in a comprehensive way that enforces our border and treats people with decency and respect. Give us a chance to fix this problem. Don't try to kill this bill before it gets moving," Bush told students and instructors at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center.

Bush repeatedly cast the matter as one of political courage.

"Those determined to find fault with this bill will always be able to look at a narrow slice of it and find something they don't like," the president said. "If you want to kill the bill, if you don't want to do what's right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it.

"You can use it to frighten people," Bush said. "Or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all."

The bill would give temporary legal status to millions of unlawful immigrants, provided they came forward, paid a fine and underwent criminal background checks. To apply for a green card, they would have to pay another fine, learn English, return to their home country and wait in line.

The plan also would create a guest worker program. It would allow foreign laborers to come to the U.S. for temporary stints, yet with no guarantee they can eventually gain citizenship.

Both the new visa plan and the temporary worker program are contingent on other steps coming first. Those include fencing and barriers along the Mexico border, the hiring of more Border Patrol agents and the completion of an identification system to verify employees' legal status.

The legislation would also reshape future immigration decisions. A new point system would prioritize skills and education over family in deciding who can immigrate.

Georgia's senators both played leading roles in producing Bush's deal with the Senate. Yet they have also said they may not support the final bill, depending upon how it is amended.

Bush chastised those who say the proposal offers amnesty to illegal immigrants. He called it empty political rhetoric.

[falcon]

The GOP Caves On Border Security; "GOP Sellout"


Word is leaking that the GOP in the Senate are on the verge of agreeing to an immigration bill that has --as a concession to the GOP-- less than half of the fencing promised by law last year.
White flag time on the border, and a national security and thus a political disaster.
The GOP are sending around talking points attempting to make this "compromise" defensible, but it won't and shouldn't fly. Agreeing to it takes the party down the tubes on the issue of border security --because it doesn't provide what the public understands to be border security, a very long, very high fence with a very wide gate.
This is McCain's continuing gift to the GOP, and the immigration absolutists' legacy: Lots and lots of promises and no fence worth calling a fence.
Aren't there 41 GOP senators willing to fight for border security? Apparently not. And they will see the result in their depleted coffers and diminished numbers come November '08. All they have to do is fight for border security, but they won't even do that.



http://consevativetable.dmc2.yuku.co...-Sellout-.html

[Sean Osborne]

Mr. President, with all due respect, you are on the wrong side of this issue. Period. You urgently need to wake up to the will of the American people on the border security and illegal immigration issue or risk total isolation and ostracization from the base of the Republican Party and American Patriots of every political flavor.



http://tancredo.house.gov/press/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1283

Tancredo Amendment to Cut Funding for Sanctuary Cities Passes with Strong Bipartisan Support

“The times, they are a changing.” – Rep. Tancredo

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – U.S. Representative Tom Tancredo’s (R-CO) amendment to cut funding from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Bill (H.R. 2638) for cities that employ a sanctuary policy passed the House with strong bipartisan support today; 234 to 189.
“The times, they are a changing,” said an exuberant Tancredo, who had introduced the same amendment several times in the past with far less support. “This should also serve as a warning sign to the White House and supporters of re-introducing an amnesty bill from the Senate. If that legislation makes it to the House, it is in serious trouble.”
The Amendment would prevent cities like Denver and San Francisco who employ a sanctuary policy for illegal aliens from receiving first responder funds, including law enforcement and terrorism prevention grants, among other programs.
Tancredo concluded, “The days that local officials could pander to the open borders special interests are over.”

[Ryan Ruck]

For Bush, Fight Over Immigration Bill Is Personal

President Bush sounded like he hoped to sever ties with the remaining 30 percent who like him when he went after critics in his party this week over opposition to his latest immigration plan.

"If you want to scare the American people, what you say is the bill's an amnesty bill," Bush said during a stop in Glynco, Ga. "That's empty political rhetoric, trying to frighten our citizens."

It was his harshest public backhand yet to the conservative bloggers, commentators, politicians and CNN anchor Lou Dobbs, all gassing about how the bill amounts to amnesty.

"People shouldn't fear our capacity to uphold our motto, E Pluribus Unum," Bush told McClatchy Newspapers.

The compromise Senate bill is drawing fire from Republicans and Democrats. Critics on the left don't like the high fees and penalties for illegal immigrations, or the shift away from reuniting families and toward valuing education and skills in deciding who gets in. Conservative critics are calling it amnesty because it includes provisions for those in the U.S. illegally to eventually become citizens.

Points to Texas' diversity

For Bush, the fight over immigration reform is a personal one — unlike Social Security or education reform, which were mostly political.

"I feel passionate about the issue. It's something I have felt strongly about ever since I was the governor of Texas," he said.

"Texas is a very diverse state, Houston is a very diverse city, and through that diversity, if you're open-minded, you get a great sense of how it invigorates the society," said Bush, a Houston resident in the 1960s and '70s.

Growing up in Texas, Bush said, "you recognize the decency and hard work and humanity of Hispanics. And the truth of the matter is a lot of this immigration debate is driven as a result of Latinos being in our country."

Or to be more specific, an unhappiness about Latinos being in the country. Bush, for the first time, is putting opponents on notice that he's going to call them out on their xenophobia if he needs to. In last year's failed effort at passing immigration reform, he never went that far.

"A lot of us in Texas were very aware of the immigration issue way before the rest of the country," Bush told McClatchy. Bush is working to keep the bill intact and moving forward.

His brother, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, joined former Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman in co-authoring an op-ed in Thursday's Wall Street Journal, calling on Republicans to support the bill.

In addition to arguing the merits, the two noted the political damage to the Republican Party after California in 1994 passed Proposition 187, a measure denying many public services to illegal immigrants.

"The GOP won the governor's mansion in the short term, but alienated the fastest-growing constituency in the state," they said.

With Congress out of town on recess, Bush had the microphone largely to himself on immigration. But he may not be getting traction because of the war in Iraq. The unpopular, long-running conflict has eroded public trust in the president and makes it harder for him to pass a domestic agenda. It also makes it easier for members of Congress to oppose him.

[Backstop]

They're gonna ram this bill - or one like it - down our throats.

They know most of the population doesn't want it.

Yet they persist.

I hope some of them are still alive in 20 years, and are unable to learn Spanish/Mexican/Whatever.

[Ryan Ruck]

Bush Hopes To Revive Immigration Bill

President Bush, trying to recover from a stinging setback on immigration, will personally try in a visit to the Capitol next week to revive the embattled plan for legalizing millions of unlawful immigrants.

He began his hands-on approach Friday, placing phone calls to three key Republican senators from Air Force One during a European trip.

The calls and Bush's scheduled lunch on Tuesday with GOP senators are part of a campaign by the White House and allies in both parties to placate or outmaneuver conservative Republicans who blocked the broad immigration measure this week. They said Friday they would try again to reach accord on the number of amendments the dissidents could offer.

Opponents of the bill promised to continue fighting all such efforts, and some House members declared the legislation dead.

Democratic leaders accused Bush of being too tepid in pushing the legislation, which would tighten borders and offer employers more temporary workers from abroad in addition to providing lawful status to an estimated 12 million illegal aliens and putting many of them on a path toward citizenship

Many Republicans defended the president's role. But the bill's backers nonetheless welcomed his plan to attend the GOP senators' weekly luncheon in the Capitol for the first time in five years.

The visit was scheduled before this week's immigration votes, and Bush will discuss numerous subjects with Republican senators, said White House spokesman Scott Stanzel. "But certainly immigration is a topic" high on the list, he said.

Stanzel said Bush called GOP Sens. Jon Kyl (news, bio, voting record) of Arizona, Trent Lott (news, bio, voting record) of Mississippi and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (news, bio, voting record) of Kentucky on Friday. He said Bush and the three senators "are optimistic that this legislation will be brought back for consideration."

Bush also planned to devote his Saturday radio address to immigration.

Senate backers of the immigration bill fell 15 votes short of the 60 needed Thursday to limit debate and allow a vote on the measure itself. Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev., then set the measure aside, calling it "the president's bill" and saying Bush's direct intervention was crucial to reviving it.

On Friday, some key Republicans agreed. "Whose bill is it?" Sen. Lindsey Graham (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., said in a news briefing held by bill supporters. "Harry Reid says this is the Bush proposal. Harry Reid is right."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino, talking with reporters traveling with Bush in Europe, said the president "continues to be regularly briefed" on the legislation. The administration, she said, is encouraging Reid "to keep the debate open. It's a very important issue; people want to have conversations about it."

Several Senate conservatives continue to say they were not allowed to offer enough changes to the bill. Some of their proposals would make it easier to detect and deport immigrants who have overstayed their visas or committed other violations.

Sen. Jim DeMint (news, bio, voting record), R-S.C., a key opponent, said the bill as written "still unfairly burdens taxpayers, doesn't ensure secure borders and guarantees amnesty" for illegal immigrants.

The bill's supporters say DeMint and other critics will oppose the measure no matter how many amendments are accepted. Nonetheless, they agreed Friday that some type of peace accord with the conservatives is essential if the measure is to return to life.

"If we're able to come up with a list of amendments that could take two or even three days to complete, 10 years from now or 100 years from now who will care that it was an extra three days if we can achieve the result that we're talking about?" said Republican Sen. Kyl of Arizona.

Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., told reporters he was hopeful because the Senate "is a chemical place. There's a flow to activity here. The tide comes in and goes out. And once in a while, the stars get lined up correctly, and we move ahead."

Some House Democrats and Republicans declared the Bush-backed legislation dead, saying the only viable alternative would focus more heavily on tightening borders without granting lawful status to those who entered the country illegally.

"The Senate immigration bill was a deeply, deeply flawed proposal, and I'm glad it has finally landed in the political graveyard," said freshman Rep. Nancy Boyda (news, bio, voting record), D-Kan. "America needs enforcement, not amnesty."

"This bill is dead," said Rep. Brian Bilbray (news, bio, voting record), R-Calif. He called for new legislation "that does not grant amnesty" but focuses instead on border security and workplace enforcement.

[Sean Osborne]

For Bush, Fight Over Immigration Bill Is Personal

This article says it ALL as far as I am concerned. It defines for me the bottom line in this entire affair.

President George W. Bush is following the dictates of an American political, economic and intellectual ELITE, and NOT the will of We The People of this Constitutional Republic ON THIS ISSUE and a COUPLE OF RELATED ONES - specifically the SPP and NAFTA (a/k/a the framework for the "North American Union").

Backstop is right, this ELITE will do their damnedest to cram this down our throats despite the level of opposition of the Conservative base against it.

And as Backstop wrote, "Yet they persist."

The question is why? Why do these ELITES persist with an agenda that the vast majority - the electorate, the constituency - is dead set against?

They do so because their agenda is much bigger, on a global scale. It is a re-shaping of the political landscape of the entire planet into ten regional centers of power, a deca-polar world order of stability they believe will result from the re-organization. It is without question an implementation of what W's father talked about in the aftermath of the Gulf War. The ELITES believed at that time that the world was ready to be reshaped into a New World Order. They were wrong - there was prepatory work yet to be done. Now that work continues. Our segment of this concieved NEW WORLD ORDER is to be known as the "North American Union" and built upon the template that is the current European Union.

Back to the second article Ryan cited...

Bush's scheduled lunch on Tuesday with GOP senators are part of a campaign by the White House and allies in both parties to placate or outmaneuver conservative Republicans

George W. Bush is trying to 'outmaneuver' his own core constituency? That's you and me folks. You and me.

Democratic leaders accused Bush of being too tepid in pushing the legislation

Yeah, the other part of this cabal of political, economic and intellectual ELITES. IT COULD NOT BE ANY CLEARER.

However, this is nothing new... let's return to the first article Ryan cited and linked above:

...former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, joined former Republican Party Chairman Ken Mehlman in co-authoring an op-ed in Thursday's Wall Street Journal, calling on Republicans to support the bill.

In addition to arguing the merits, the two noted the political damage to the Republican Party after California in 1994 passed Proposition 187, a measure denying many public services to illegal immigrants.

"The GOP won the governor's mansion in the short term, but alienated the fastest-growing constituency in the state," they said.

Whoa!!! Let's read that last critical piece again... 'ALIENATED THE FASTEST-GROWING CONSTITUENCY IN THE STATE'.

Let the truth of what that statement really is sink in for a second...

The truth of that statement is this: The taxpaying American citizens of the State of California ALIENATED the fastest-growing state constituency by their enfranchised VOTE AGAINST Proposition 187 (a/k/a the "SAVE OUR STATE" initiative) in 1994. That fastest-growing constituency are ILLEGAL ALIENS which these AMERICAN ELITISTS HAVE ALLOWED TO INVADE CALIFORNIA AND EVERY OTHER STATE IN THE UNION BECAUSE IT IS WITHIN THEIR LONG-TERM AGENDA TO DO SO.

Hello?

The will of the people of California was executed. By a vote of 60% Proposition 187 was passed on Nov. 8, 1994 to deny public benefits to illegal aliens in California.

A Federal court, under the leadership of newly elected California Govenor Gray Davis, overturned the will of the people four years later in 1998.

Backstop, is probably right, this will be jammed down our throats by the ELITE. So much for the will of the people and our rights under Constitutional Law.

[Backstop]

Backstop is right, this ELITE will do their damnedest to cram this down our throats despite the level of opposition of the Conservative base against it.

And as Backstop wrote, "Yet they persist."

The question is why? Why do these ELITES persist with an agenda that the vast majority - the electorate, the constituency - is dead set against?

They do so because their agenda is much bigger, on a global scale. It is a re-shaping of the political landscape of the entire planet into ten regional centers of power, a deca-polar world order of stability they believe will result from the re-organization.

Guess I'm just rehasing old stuff here, but it's such an incredibly tough pill to swallow.

For a coupla years, I've said here and elsewhere that 'I can't figure out why they won't seal the borders.'

And recently (as I've said), I believe it has to do with the NAU/etc.

And now, Pres. Bush is pushing an agenda that is vehemently opposed by the majority of the voters.

As those that know me understand, I’m not one to subscribe to the Alex Jones/NWO/Jibba Jabba.

But something is going on here; and it most certainly does not entertain the wishes or security of American citizens.

I sit greatly disturbed...

--------------------------------

Sean, I haven't heard of the "deca-polar world order of stability."

I'll have to look into that.

I'm interested to see if that ties in somehow to Biblical Prophecy.

[Sean Osborne]

Guess I'm just rehasing old stuff here, but it's such an incredibly tough pill to swallow.

For a coupla years, I've said here and elsewhere that 'I can't figure out why they won't seal the borders.'

And recently (as I've said), I believe it has to do with the NAU/etc.

And now, Pres. Bush is pushing an agenda that is vehemently opposed by the majority of the voters.

As those that know me understand, I’m not one to subscribe to the Alex Jones/NWO/Jibba Jabba.

But something is going on here; and it most certainly does not entertain the wishes or security of American citizens.

I sit greatly disturbed...

That makes a disturbed several millions of us Backstop. The whole country seems to be seething over this... and I also would be among the last to subscribe to Jones et al NWO jibba jabba... I vehemently disagree with the manner in which he and others approach the topic. Yet still here we see elitists doing what they will to do by any means at their disposal. I just don't see any other way to slice it.

Overall I view this topic in this manner... the TAA and TFP are similar themes - themes that some would call "conspiratorial" - yet the evidence of the TAA/TFP agenda is apparently as clear as the daily news headlines. In the secular sense, I see this topic in the same way - the evidence is overwhelming and occupies a portion of the same headlines we see day to day.

Sean, I haven't heard of the "deca-polar world order of stability."

I'll have to look into that.

I'm interested to see if that ties in somehow to Biblical Prophecy.

'Deca-polar world order of stability' is a phrase I have coined to describe the last days world order described in the Bible. Short version - it's the ten-headed beast. This Biblical aspect can go to that forum for further discussion.

[Backstop]

Gotta love Ms. Malkin.

The most poignant line: "it ain't over 'til the alien wins."

Poignant meaning:
1. The illegal aliens WILL win this battle.
2. A bill in agreement with the wishes of Pres. Bush and Ted Kennedy? Who would've thought that could ever come to pass?

NewYorkPost

SILENT AMNESTY
By MICHELLE MALKIN

June 17, 2007 -- AS you follow the debate over the Bush-Kennedy immigration bill, keep this cardinal rule in mind: 99.99 percent of the lawmakers who promise you that they'll ensure the deportation of anyone who doesn't follow their new "guest-worker" regulations are either A) lying or B) completely clueless.

Rule No. 2: Anyone who plays the Enforcement equals Kicking-Down-Doors-And-Depriving-Babies-of-Mother's-Milk card (yes, that's you, Geraldo Rivera) is either A) lying or B) completely clueless.

As I've reported many times over the last several years, the nation's deportation abyss is governed by one reality: "It ain't over 'til the alien wins." Immigration lawyers and ethnic activists run a massive, lucrative industry whose sole objective is to help illegal aliens and convicted criminal visa holders evade deportation for as long as possible.

Entry into this country should be a privilege, not a right. The open-borders lobby has turned that principle on its head.

Look no further than New York, where four convicted criminal aliens - a child molester, two killers and a racketeer - just won a federal lawsuit to remain here after all being ordered deported.

The stunning decision June 1 from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, Blake v. Carbone will greatly expand the number of criminal aliens convicted of certain aggravated felonies who can now receive relief from deportation.

The lead winning plaintiff, Leroy Blake, is a Jamaican national convicted of first-degree sexual abuse of a minor in 1992. The feds began deportation proceedings in 1999. An immigration judge ruled Blake deportable in 2000.

Blake took his case to the federal Board of Immigration Appeals, which remanded the case back to the judge, who granted him relief from deportation. The Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) appealed the judge's ruling. In 2005, the Board of Immigration Appeals sided with the INS and ordered Blake removed from the country.

Blake filed a motion to reconsider, then took his case to the Second Circuit.

The other plaintiffs who've successfully gamed the system include:

* Aundre Singh, a native of Guyana, was convicted of second-degree murder in 1986. In 1997, the INS moved to deport him. In 1998, an immigration judge ordered him deported. In 1999, the Board of Immigration Appeals dismissed Singh's appeal. In 2003, Singh filed a motion to reconsider, which the appeals board denied. Singh filed for reconsideration of that ruling, which was denied in 2004. He tried again to appeal the board's ruling in 2005 and was denied again before heading to the Second Circuit for relief.

* Errol Foster, a Jamaican national, killed a man with a pistol in 1990. He pleaded guilty to first-degree manslaughter and got out of prison in 2002. The feds began deportation proceedings while he was still in custody. A judge ordered his removal in 2000, which Foster appealed. The Board of Immigration Appeals rejected his appeal in 2001. Four years later, Foster was still in the country - appealing the rejected appeal and filing three separate federal lawsuits before getting lucky with the Second Circuit.

* Ho Yoon Chong, a South Korean national, was sentenced in 1995 for racketeering. In 1998, the INS moved to deport him. In 2002, a judge ordered him deported. In 2004, the Board of Immigration Appeals sided with the judge. Like his fellow criminal aliens, Chong didn't give up, and now he's won the immigration litigation lottery.

Immigration lawyers representing criminal aliens like these four menaces have gummed up the court system with 11 years of litigation over two 1996 laws that severely restricted deportation waivers for aliens convicted of aggravated felonies.

Meanwhile, deportable aliens can appeal directly to their member of Congress to circumvent immigration laws through special legislation.

More than 50 bills have been introduced this year that would grant special, private relief to individual immigrants fighting deportation. Past and present beneficiaries have included smugglers, illegal aliens - and a convicted murderer, Mohuiddin A.K.M. Ahmed, who is wanted in Bangladesh for engaging in terrorist activity and participating in a 1975 assassination plot that left the prime minister and dozens of his family members dead.

Democrats and Republicans alike continue to sponsor these "private relief" bills seeking to sabotage deportation efforts. The bills needn't pass for the recipients to gain benefits.

Mere introduction of the bills buys the deportable aliens time that law-abiding citizens can't buy in our court system.

Open-borders Democrats led by Ted Kennedy bleat about the lack of "due process" for aliens, but immigration lawyers and their clients know the deal. Whether the Bush-Kennedy bill passes or not, it ain't over 'til the alien wins.

This is the real "silent amnesty" that no one in Washington will talk about. Go ahead. Ask them.

[Backstop]

"Vigilantes"...remember that one?

Now it's xenophobes, nativists, and racists.

This handbasket is becoming most uncomfortable.

And the most important question in red.

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/thomas060507.php3

No more trust on immigration

By Cal Thomas

June 5, 2007 / 19 Sivan, 5767


http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |Former senator and probable Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson brought Virginia Republicans to their feet last Saturday night in Richmond when he said the public no longer believes in politicians who promise to secure the U.S. border as part of a bipartisan immigration bill.

"You've got to secure the border first, before you do anything," said Thompson. "The members (of Congress) say it's right here in this bill: the border. The response is, 'We don't care what's on a piece of paper — secure the border.' The piece of paper doesn't secure the border."

Thompson claimed the bill now being debated in the Senate is "the same deal" offered in the 1986 amnesty: legalization of aliens in exchange for border security. He said the public won't be fooled again.

When Thompson speaks of distrusting Washington politicians, he is including Republicans and President Bush, who in recent weeks — in company with members of his administration — have taken to labeling opponents of the bill xenophobes and nativists, even suggesting some are racists.

Among many reasons to distrust the immigration bill is the failure of the administration to convince the public it would hold accountable people who break a new law, when they have been lax enforcing existing laws. If illegals refuse, or claim they can't pay the proposed $5,000 fine to obtain a legal visa, or if they abscond, as many have, will the government then roll out the buses and jets and deport them, along with family members who were either born here or allowed to immigrate as part of the "chain migration" that has brought so many in the past?

In a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal's Kimberley Strassel, the president again asserted there will be economic benefits to the country from permitting millions more foreigners to live among us. Strassel writes, "Studies have shown that immigrants add some $10 billion annually in net economic output." That is misleading.

A new report by The Heritage Foundation says the American taxpayer pays for tens of billions of dollars in services and other benefits to households of low-skill immigrants, many of them illegal.

Analysts Robert Rector and Christine Kim write that on average, each of these 4.5 million households receives nearly three dollars in taxpayer-funded services for every dollar it pays in taxes. They say that while low-skill immigrants paid an average $10,573 in taxes in fiscal 2004, they received nearly three times as much — $30,160 per household — in government benefits and services for a "fiscal deficit" of $19,587.

That deficit might be tolerable if it were for a short and fixed term and illegal immigrants were required to learn English, receive a good education and improve their lot beyond manual labor. But the chances of illegal immigrants doing that are equal to politicians telling the truth about the immigration bill. The Pew Hispanic Center reports that one-third of all foreign-born persons in the United States are Mexican and of that number half are illegal. At least half of the adult illegal aliens in the U.S. lack a high school degree, compared to 25 percent of legal immigrants without one.

In the Journal interview, the president reveals what's really at the heart of the debate: politics. "If people think that a party is against somebody or some group of people, you'll pay a political price for it." He then likened those opposed to the immigration bill to people who once opposed civil rights for blacks. Strassel links civil rights opponents to the Republican Party, but the majority party during most of those years was the Democratic Party and the majority of those opposed to civil rights legislation were Southern Democrats.

If the president thinks this is about politics, he should open the borders and let anyone come who will come. Why tell any immigrant "no" if they, or their native land, might be offended? Democrats clearly believe illegals are potential recruits into their party. If Republicans fall for this crass appeal to import new voters, they will deservedly suffer electoral deportation from what remains of their power. Already, contributions to the GOP by grassroots donors have declined 40 percent, according to The Washington Times. They cite the immigration bill as their main reason for reduced donations. This trend will continue if the Washington politicians keep trying to force a bill down the throats of those who don't want it.

Whose country is this? Does it belong to illegal immigrants and politicians, or to the citizens of the United States of America?

[Brian Baldwin]

It USED to belong to American Citizens. It no longer does. It belongs to vocal groups that represent the minority of our nation's voters and any criminal inside and outside the system. The real question is... "How much longer do we allow them to possess our nation?"

[Sean Osborne]

It USED to belong to American Citizens. It no longer does. It belongs to vocal groups that represent the minority of our nation's voters and any criminal inside and outside the system. The real question is... "How much longer do we allow them to possess our nation?"

Brian,

The vocal groups that you describe have been the case since Kennedy-Johnson and Nixon's era if not before. Their jaw-flapping is really nothing new.

Back in the days, which in fact were our parents days of 30 to 40 years ago, folks like us were known as the "Silent Majority." In this respect nothing has changed. Just ask your parents. However, there is a slight difference.

The difference in the recent era, as noted by Michelle Malkin and Cal Thomas (thanks for posting those articles Backstop!) is that the elites which I spoke of in my rant above have been driving the issue per their agenda and allowing the tidal wave of illegal immigrants into America since at least the mid-1980's when the first useless pile of illegal immigration legislation was passed into law. It was unenforced and did absolutely nothing. Useless as a cow pie.

Now the "Silent Majority" is keyed upon illegal immigration, dead set against it - it is the defining issue to the core constituency of conservative voters in the 2008 election because it is directly related to homeland security and homeland defense. Conservatives want to keep America as it is with Legal immigration and will aloow nothing even close to resembling a union with Mexico or Canada - let them remain sovereign nations as well, the defense arrangement to ensure our "North American' sovereignties already exists.

Yet our President and the other political, economic and intellectual elites stand against the will of the people, and curse us with ad hoiminems not unlike those used by Michael Medved to label opposition to the SPP. This fact is now as plain as the noses on our faces.

So we are against our President on this issue. There is nothing to be done physically until election day, that is when the "Silent Majority" will speak.

Perhaps something more will be necessary after the will of the people is once again overturned by a Federal court. But until then, I just pray we can arrive intact to vote in the November 2008 election.

[Sean Osborne]

As disgusting as this image is, I feel it needs to be seen by all who read this thread.

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/herring/070617


Excerpt:

The three-pronged plan of attack

This essay is about a three-pronged plan of attack designed to diminish American sovereignty, strength, security, and stability. Regardless of how anyone voted, and as important as that information is, the problem goes much deeper than that. I am firmly persuaded that the amnesty bill is only one part of a plan to bring this nation down. What do I mean when I speak of a "three pronged" plan of attack?

1 — There is the latest immigration bill slated to return to the Senate floor for debate. Despite all the rhetorical subterfuge and denials, it is true that passage of the immigration reform Congress is wrestling with would, de facto, grant amnesty to anywhere from 12–20 million illegal immigrants.

2 — Then there is NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement. This agreement has already contributed to economic problems that will have long-term negative impact on our nation. Don't be fooled by the fact that most of these negative effects have yet to materialize, because they are coming and I intend to show you why.

3 — In addition to NAFTA, now there is CAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement. I believe CAFTA is the more dangerous of the two.

[Sean Osborne]

Time to go to the source...

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/williams061707.htm

Behind the Amnesty Agenda

Time to Go to the Source

By J.B. Williams
Sunday, June 17, 2007

The American people are up in arms over the current push to legalize illegal migration from south of our border. But unless they are prepared to take up arms, they are likely to lose the battle over immigration reform.

Our government tells us that they have already allowed somewhere between 12 and 20 million illegal aliens to migrate to America in violation of existing immigration laws and that rather than enforcing those laws, we should simply look the other way while they make new laws that simply legalize the practice.

If we don’t like it, that’s tough!


Though Americans have been quite outspoken in their opposition to such an anti-American agenda, that opposition appears to be falling upon deaf ears in Washington, DC and push is well on its way to shove on the matter.

Illegal invaders are marching in American streets carrying Mexican flags and demanding full unfettered American constitutional rights, including voting rights and many of our elected representatives in Washington have spoken at their illegal rallies promising to comply.

Washington is clearly listening to somebody, just not to the American people.


Americans are clear on the subject. We want enforcement of existing immigration laws, period. We want the people we elected to protect and preserve our sovereign nation to do just that. Until this happens, we have no interest in new immigration statutes of any kind.

But Washington is not listening, at least to the American people. So who are they listening to?


Democrats are fully behind illegal immigration and they have been for many years. It is a vital ingredient in their effort to build an unbeatable proletariat voting majority that will insure Democrat victories at the ballot box for decades to come. These unskilled minimum wage workers are going to vote Democrat and nobody knows this better than Democrats eager to pass some form of amnesty, even allowing voting rights, in time for the ’08 election if possible.

But Bush and many Republicans are equally determined to help the Democrat Party pick up millions of new voters and unless you look closely at who is behind the Amnesty Agenda, you can not figure out why…

Key political lobby groups are pushing your representatives to pass Amnesty, legalizing illegal migration and they are pushing much harder than you are pushing back.

The formidable pro-Amnesty lobby includes the Roman Catholic Church, eager to fill their pews and collection plates with largely Catholic Mexican migrants. If you are a Catholic opposed to Amnesty, you need to take that up with your church leadership which is pushing Washington to legalize illegal immigration.

Software giants Oracle and Microsoft, both enormous supporters of both political parties, threaten to move more high tech jobs out of the country if electronics corporations don't get more contract migrant labor. If you are an employee of these companies or many others like them and you oppose legalizing illegal immigration, you need to make your case to the boards of these corporations, not the senators they are threatening. If you are a consumer of computer goods and services who opposes illegal immigration, you had better stop buying products from these companies and let them know why.

Many other corporate spokespeople also announced they were looking for ways to revive the Senate bill in which they'd invested so much political capital. Are you working for or buying products from any of these companies? You had better start looking…

As reported by Political Affairs, “The National Immigration Forum and the DC umbrella group it initiated, the Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform, were key players in this strategy. Behind them was the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition, which brought together over 40 of the largest corporate trade and manufacturing associations in the country, under the aegis of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. EWIC head John Gay, also head of the National Restaurant Association, chairs the NIF board.”

This is a very broad powerful lobby my fellow Americans and it is very well organized and very well funded.

Demands to pass Amnesty are coming from groups as diverse as the National Restaurant Association, the National Council of La Raza, the New England Apple Council, Unite Here, a union representing apparel, hotel and laundry workers, the United States Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Federation of Independent Business and the Business Roundtable. Farmers and ranchers from coast to coast told the Senate to get the job done!

The American people may be no match for such a powerful pro-Amnesty lobby.


Spokesman for Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid, James P. Manley, said the news media criticism had “zero effect” on the majority leader. Many have questioned the strength of his commitment, but Senator Reid insisted, “I have every desire to complete this legislation.”

Senator Reid promised Friday to “keep the Senate in session on weekends if necessary to complete work on the immigration bill this month.”

Internet giant Google and software stalwart Intel are also pushing for low-cost migrant labor and both are well known for their decidedly liberal (read Democrat) views and support of the global socialist movement.

So, for those of you, who think rich republican capitalists are front and center behind the Amnesty agenda, think again… Some are, but they are not the driving force behind the agenda, they are the foolish followers of the agenda.

The TOP 527 contributor in the 2006 mid-term election that shifted congressional power to Democrats was the Service Employees International Union, giving $33 million in 2006 alone, nearly all of it to Democrats.

“Voters in the 2006 mid-term elections sent a strong message to elected leaders that Americans want Congress to fix our failed immigration system,” wrote Andy Stern and Anna Burger, the International President and International Secretary-Treasurer, respectively, of SEIU. “We look forward to working with you in the 110th Congress to pass a workable, effective comprehensive immigration reform package the President can sign.”

The bottom line is this…


The American people are going to have Amnesty stuffed down their throats one way or another, like it or not and here’s why.

Washington, DC listens to the loudest voice and that voice is always whoever spends the most money to lobby for their agenda. The American people can scream all they want, but politicians on both sides of the political aisle are deafened by the millions being thrown at them from the pro-amnesty lobby.

So long as congress is allowed to pass unwanted legislation by piggybacking it on another piece of desirable legislation, or by bribing supportive votes with ear-marked pork for unrelated pet projects, they will find a way to pass whatever they want and right now, they want amnesty for millions of new Democrat voters more than they want anything else on earth.

The way to stop it…


Since Bush and congressional Democrats now in control of congress are united on amnesty, and remain deaf to demands from the American people who insist that there be NO AMNESTY and FULL ENFORCEMENT of existing immigration laws, the American people will have to go directly to the source of the Amnesty Agenda.
Those companies and organizations currently engaged in bribing or threatening Washington into amnesty must begin to hear from the American people directly and immediately.
So long as they remain exempt from penalty for their efforts to push their anti-American agenda upon Washington, they will remain committed to and victorious in those efforts.
Washington is caught between these organizations and the American people. They are indeed largely to blame for their current situation. Had they enforced immigration laws in the past, they would not be trying to figure out what to do with 12 – 20 million already here illegally now.
Either those listed in this column and others like them are going to dictate Washington policy, or the American people will. Time is running out. You decide…
I’ll go after every member of congress that votes in support of Amnesty at the ballot box in 2008 and I bet a lot of other folks will too.
But until then, the way to stop this thing from passing is to stop or at least reduce the pressure on Washington to pass it, by going direct to the source of that pressure. Start with the organizations named in this column!

JB Williams is a business man, a husband, a father, and a writer. A no nonsense commentator on American politics, American history, and American philosophy. He is published nationwide and in many countries around the world. JB. Williams can be reached at: JBW@JB-Williams.com Opinion 200720062005

[Backstop]

It USED to belong to American Citizens. It no longer does. It belongs to vocal groups that represent the minority of our nation's voters and any criminal inside and outside the system. The real question is... "How much longer do we allow them to possess our nation?"

Will have to read the rest of the thread later, but...

Brian, I've been thinking about this all day.

I think we're at a pivotal point in this nation's political journey.

Pres. Bush and Kennedy want something (Amnesty), and the majority of the population doesn't.

The GOP is in a shambles.

Remember the email I wrote to Mel Martinez? Well, I have yet to receive a reply, except to say it was forwarded. My vote freaking counts. DO NOT IGNORE ME!

If the Dems/Libs gain the majority of control, I honestly think we're doomed as a nation.

The last week, I've been working with/near a real, honest to God, 59 year old hippie. The insight I've gained into the Liberal mindset is nauseating, to put it mildly. The short version is: Raise taxes so the government can give us more benefits, and take care of me because I won't assume any personal responsibility. BLECH!!

So...the REAL Conservative Republicans regain control of the helm - even it's just baby steps - or it's down to the cess pool we go with the Dems/Libs.

You asked, "How much longer...?"

My best answer is "until the next election(s)."

If we don't elect a true Conservative and boot the Dems/Libs from office/control, illegal aliens will OVERWHELM this nation. Mark my words.

And that doesn't even touch on border security...

Yeah, that's kind of a cross-Forum post, but sometimes it's tough to seperate things.

[T.L.]

(San Diego, Ca.) -- Authorities have found a 19-foot long boat suspected of being used for smuggling illegal aliens on U.S. Navy property, just north of Point Loma. A report of a grounded vessel in the Sunset Cliffs area was reported about 12:30 yesterday afternoon. Nobody was on board when the boat was searched by San Diego lifeguards. The Coast Guard is conducting an investigation. /


Illegals, whether Mexican's looking for work and social service bennies, or OTM's which may very well include those seeking to do us harm, are coming in down here and it surely appears to me that no one is paying much attention.

I could not help but notice how casually todays article mentions the boat found on Navy property. Anyone comfortable with this? I did'nt think so.

Backstop is absolutly correct about being at a "pivotal point" but unfortunatly the point has gone largely unguarded by those running the show these days. It appears that even the U.S. Navy is not guarding their own "point" from Mexicans or even terrorists floating on in to do whatever they please.

I've lived in the San Diego area my whole life, but I hardly recognize this place anymore.

[Backstop]

I could not help but notice how casually todays article mentions the boat found on Navy property. Anyone comfortable with this? I did'nt think so.

Not comfortable.

But I understand the machinations; I believe the MSM is aligned with whatever ’group’ is directing this nation.

I’m starting to sound just a little too Jones-ish.

HA!

[Sean Osborne]

When push comes to shove... the truth is stranger than any fiction.

[samizdat]

"A lot of Americans are skeptical about immigration reform, primarily because they don't think the government can fix the problems," Bush said.


With or without the bill, govt. cannot fix de problems.
I read the pathetic loopholes in the bill and agree it sucks. Some form of selective amnesty, strict border control and selective deportation is essential.

This bill appears to be custers last stand in a ruse of circus maximus trying to control the masses.

Bush and congress cannot control the US masses, let alone the move-ins, any more than Calderon etc. can control Mexico. I do believe Bush's rhetoric (false-political) is defensible in the arena of maintaining decent ties with Mexico and Pemex and avoiding more caos.

Cooperation with Mexico and Canada and their govt.s is essential since there is a high probability that SOON- Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela- will cease to provide oil for gas and heating.

The G-8 summit was not about global warming (in the Gore(Y) sense. More like global warning.

BTW- that's the 2nd image of Bush I've seen flippin the bird. Cruddy bill, cram it? Could be redacted. Who obeys laws and constitutions these days anyway?