President Bush has been an advocate of trying to find a way to let illegal immigrants stay in the USA while not doing a whole lot to prevent more from crossing the border, but the activists and immigrant agitators seem to think this speech is a prime time for a statement. At the Captain's Quarters, Captain Ed has the story:
Now, with President Bush about to make a prime-time Oval Office speech intended to rescue his immigration reform plan, the same activists are about to do it again, planning a loud and angry response to tonight's speech:
Immigration activists, however, appear intent on killing that reform through their arrogant demands and their association with the rabid socialists of International ANSWER. Once content to work quietly to build sympathy for poor migrant workers looking for a better life, the immigration movement suddenly decided this year that they instead wanted to make themselves into a civil-rights movement for people whose very presence breaks the law they want as protection.
As President Bush prepares to address the nation tonight about immigration, a newly formed network of groups that organized demonstrations for illegal immigrants is conference calling, brainstorming and consolidating its forces so that it can respond to the government with a unified voice.
The We Are America Alliance of 41 immigrant resource groups, unions, churches, day laborers and Spanish-language disc jockeys opposes House legislation that would criminalize illegal immigrants, but it will lobby Congress and compromise to realize its goal of obtaining legal residency for many of the 11 million people who live in the shadows...
Commenters on the ship had this to say:
Deepak Bhargava... said the president has to make hard choices. "It's not going to be possible for Bush to thread the needle and create something that makes the right happy" while also pleasing moderates, he said.[emphasis mine]
Note the loaded language here: anybody who wants the border enforced is "the [evil, hard-core, Christian] right", while anybody who supports what amounts to amnesty and unfettered illegal immigration is "moderate".
Frankly, I consider myself moderate on this issue. Though I want the border enforced (preferably with a fence), I also support changes to our immigration laws to make it easier for people to come here LEGALLY. I'm also not especially eager to start rounding up illegals who are already here, though I also am not about to grant them amnesty ESPECIALLY in the face of threats and bullying.
I wonder if this story (doubtless there are others like it throughout the MSM) doesn't represent a last-ditch attempt by the lefties to try to sway Bush before he makes his speech tonight.
US immigration urgently needs reforming, but I am not sure if the present direction is right. There is a lot of potential immigrants willing and dreaming all over the word. The best US can offer is, as far as I remember, a meager 60k visa lottery wins! To appease activists there is another quota for “refugees” and again it is I think around 60k and then some (150k??) for “family unification” category, mostly used by those, who want to buy themselves a foreign wife.
All this to compensate for the illegal immigrants and in fact most of the newcomers to USA does it illegally.
We all should have problem with present situation, since first, we don’t have control over who is coming and second, we force people to start new life from breaking the law. I feel it is offensive, deeply un-American, unfair and simply wrong.
There will be always a demand for cheap labor, but it shouldn’t override national interest (I count fairness as one of them). USA can accept much more legal immigrants (for the comparison, Canada is taking around 250.000 immigrants each year. It would be equivalent to US legal immigration level of more than 2 million, since Canada’s population is ~35 million). As the parallel step I am also for much tougher treatment for people overstaying their visas, or simply not having one. A couple of countries (Australia for one) could be used as example.
Frankly, there's no evidence that I can see coming from the White House and capitol hill that will keep the "immigration reconquistas" from reaching their aims. Power seeks a vacuum. The halls of congress, in particular, is a vacous redoubt of cash back spineless blowhards on this issue. What's that giant sucking sound? It's the special interest lobbyists cleaning out their pockets to reps whose districts have industries that have become heavily addicted to cheap labor done by illegals. Enforce the the current LAW! Throw the damned book at employers who BREAK THE LAW!! Concurrently, RE-INFORCE the border while forcing mass transit deportations- then and only then draft new legislation for immigration reform THAT IS ENFORCEABLE! Are we a nation of laws, a sovergein nation with defined borders, a nation with a common language and national heritage worth fighting for or not? These days it's hard to tell.
Yes, let the mexicans elect an anti US president. That should do wonders for the sputtering Mexican economy.
Let me establish my bona fides on this and in so doing provide full disclosure.
I lived on or near the Mexican border for close to twenty years. At one point I owned a condo in San diego that was some seven miles from the border. I've spent a lot of time in Mexico, both in the border regions and a ways into the interior. I believe that I have a clear understanding of this.
Here's my take:
First, we must close the border. this will not be easy, some of this terrain is tough, but it is doable over the long haul. To bridge the time gap between now and when some physical barrier exists we must use proper personnell with proper policies. CAtch and release won't work. We gotta fly these guys all the way to the guatamelan border and let them go.
We must, as Sherriff Joe in Phoenix is doing, disrupt the supply chain of coyotes that are making millions on human smuggling. Getting these guys out our country or in our jails will make getting here tougher.
But what about the illegals already here? I see two different scenarios. There are people here who a casual visitors. They aren't guests, we didn't invite them.
these casual visitors are here either to work or commit crimes or both. We need to make life difficult for these people. If they can't find work they'll head back south. If the penalty for criminal behavior in America becomes unpalatable, they will leave.
Getting at this bunch means focusing energy on the employers. We'll get a whole bunch of blow back from these guys, but we must stay resolute.
Hiring illegals is a crime. Enforcing existing law will put a damper on the labor market and that's really what we need now. We must turn off the illegal worker magnet.
The second group is more difficult to confront. these are the people who came here illegally and have snuggled up to American society.
I think we need to take this group on cases. Are they working and behaving as citizens? Paying taxes? sending their kids to school?
Or are they living on the dole while their kids are swelling the ranks of the local street gang?
One thing we can count on is bleeding heart blow back. I expect that NPR is already looking for some Juanita Chavez who is twelve years old, living via an Iron Lung and facing death if she' forced to go back to the third world medicine of Mexico.
and yes, Skippah, the Mexicans have demonstrated a tin ear on this one. We Americans are in a surly mood. It was a stupid time to pop up with "si se puede" and the star spangled banner in spanish.
From what I heard on FoxNews this AM, this is far too little and far too late. And it will still be amnesty, no matter how it is couched. We marshalled millions of men and millions of tons of material to fight the Germans and the Japanese successfully in WWII, yet we are told we cannot marshall the necessary forces to not only secure our borders, but to start deporting these illegal aliens. To hear that we cannot deport 10 million illegals just doesn’t cut it. What if Roosevelt told us that we cannot defeat a German army with hundreds of divisions that had already swept over Europe. I have never heard a more defeatist attitude from our so-called leader and his pr people.
I want to hear him say tonight that we are coming after those companies that hire and harbor illegals and that the penalties will be severe. Short of that, this speech will be a waste of time and as low as his poll numbers are, they will only go lower.
From a personal standpoint, my daughter has not had health insurance for the last two years and is being sued by medical providers for unpaid bills. Tell me of one illegal who has received free medical service that is being sued.
This entire process stinks. No major legislation is needed for Bush to increase the size of the Border Patrol and it's unbelievable that almost 5 years after 9-11 the border remains so insecure. Sending the over-stretched military to guard the border is a bad idea from every perspective.
Currently, a large number of illegals caught on the boder are not even stopped. Only Mexicans are detained and sent back- illegals from other countries are generally released with an order to appear before a judge, which of course never happens. These illegals are released because there's no room to detain them before deportation to countries in South America. Bush could address this problem by buiding or finding more facilities. Again, no legislation is needed to make this happen but Bush has failed to effectively address the problem.
Enforcement isn't going to happen under this President. Give him credit for standing by his beliefs...but he doesn't believe in it, and Congress can't make him do even the no-cost measures like closing every Mexican consulate outside their DC embassy.
The key is the House, which is the only shaky leg of the amnesty tripod. 100% of the House is up for reelection and if they see the same degree of opposition that sprang up in early 2004, they will stand fast against the President and Senate.
As it stands I would rather have the status-quo--no new legislation--than any amnesty, and let them refer it to the voters in November--if you want "normalization" vote straight ticket Democrat.
-The Yell>>>The threats by the open-border, anti-Americans who want to flood this country with wetbacks to diltue the American culture to non-existance know what the stakes are. I think Americans are starting to wake up. I hope it is in time.>>>
Alarmist and openly bigoted.
Fear rules this issue.
About resources to marshall: That is the greatest problem with the Right. You want government services but dont want to pay for them.
If president Bush said: Hey we can round up all the 11M illegals in the next few years. It will take 5000 agents, full offices in CA, TX, AZ, NM, CO, FL, and NV. Its gonna cost us 444 Billion to do it.
second initiative: We are gonna crack down on every employer who hire illegals. That too will cost us 203 Billion.
Prices are going up, inflation is going up, our cost competitiveness against china is going down, cause to get white kids into the chicken factory, we are gonna have to pay them $14/hour.
But hey, it's what we need to do to secure a 1200 mile (or whatever) border and make sure yall are safe and sound in the republican suburbs...
I wonder how much the anti-tax base of the Republican party will say "hey dude, GOOD PLAN!"
Illegal? Legal? You depend on them whether you realize it or not. And they didnt complain until you all supported cracking down on them. They went to work. They lived their lives.
And Foston comes through with the liberal agenda. And the liberal agenda, at least according to Foston, is that we are incapable of doing anything so let's do nothing.
Isn't it interesting that this is the same illogic used when discussing our military confrontations in the GWOT?
Last week, in a post called "on being a liberal" I pointed out that practicing liberals focus on being correct. Having the correct fear is important to the American left.
so foston tells us that "Fear rules this issue". to the lackeys of the international ANSWER AKA the american left, it is wrong to fear the illegal immigrants but right to fear the NSA's data mining efforts.
do you guys have like bulletin boards where the "correct" position is posted for all liberals to see? Oh yea, I fogot the daily KOS.
Read my posts foston, are you sure you want to take this one on? It's not about fear, its about ANGER.
Foston also uses a fallacious argument technique: dire consequences. We must presume, in the absence of any supporting data, that foston made up a bunch of numbers with which to threaten us. "This will cost bilions, that will cost billions so let's not do anything" seems to be Foston's argument here.
Again, we see this same lame argument when discussion the GWOT.
My personal favorite is the spiraling cost of chicken. Oh my, the chicken people will have to pay a living wage quel domage.
A couple of questions foston:
Why is it OK for Frank Purdue to pay low salaries, but not Walmart?
what dire consequences do we face when we reach the "chicken event horizon'? Will a dramatic increase in chicken prices wreck havoc on the American way of life?
Finally, what if the price of chicken went up, but the cost of welfare went down because Shaniqua or TammiJo can get off her lazy ass and go pluck chickens instead of sitting at home watching Oprah?
Foston, if you think this all about making us "safe and sound" in our republican suburbs, you should get off your ass and go down to the border.
Better yet, spend a day in an SOCal emergency room, or a welfare office or even simply drive down the highway surrounded by drivers you know are uninsured.
You start off by castigating someone else for bigotry and then engage in it yourself. but to the American Left, bigotry toward republicans is just fine, we aren't a protected group, right foston? so you uniformed ill considered insults aimed at us won't diminish your standing as a bleeding heart liberal at all, will it?What a racist bigot you are foston. You clearly no nothing beyond what ANSWER told you. don't bring that weak assed crap in this kitchen boy.
Putting it mildly, this is the issue that the right is the most upset about. It is a combination of outrage at a lack of the rule of law, frustration at millions of lawbreakers publicly attempting to intimidate Americans, and a concern at the security threat of a virtually unprotected border for terrorists to cross. While runaway spending is very annoying, few people expect any different from government, although we wish for better and try to vote for people who won't. But this is too public, too obvious and too big to put up with any longer.