Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Bush Revives bid to legalize illegal aliens

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Brooklyn/Austin
    Posts
    2,712
    Post Thanks / Like
    [url=http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041110-123424-5467r.htm]Bish Revives bid to legalize illegal aliens[/url]

    Bush revives bid to legalize illegal aliens


    By Bill Sammon
    THE WASHINGTON TIMES


    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.
    The Arizona Republican is one of the Senate's most outspoken supporters of expanding guest-worker programs and has introduced his own bill to offer a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
    "We are formulating plans for the legislative agenda for next year," said White House political strategist Karl Rove. "And immigration will be on that agenda."
    He added: "The president had a meeting this morning to discuss with a significant member of the Senate the prospect of immigration reform. And he's going to make it an important item."
    While the president was huddling with Mr. McCain, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was pushing the plan during a visit to Mexico City.
    "The president remains committed to comprehensive immigration reform as a high priority in his second term," he told a meeting of the U.S.-Mexico Binational Commission. "We will work closely with our Congress to achieve this goal."
    But key opponents in Congress said Mr. Bush's proposal isn't going anywhere.
    "An amnesty by any other name is still an amnesty, regardless of what the White House wants to call it," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican and chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.
    "Their amnesty plan was dead on arrival when they sent it to the Congress in January, and if they send the same pig with lipstick back to Congress next January, it will suffer the same fate," he said.
    With the House and Senate already clashing over border security and deportation provisions in the pending intelligence overhaul bill, some Capitol Hill aides said it's almost impossible that Congress could agree on a broader immigration proposal.
    Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), said he "suddenly went from calm to stressed out" after learning of the president's renewed push for immigration relaxation.
    He predicted the plan would continue to meet vigorous opposition from House Republicans.
    "If the House wouldn't deliver this bill before the guy's election, when he claimed he needed it for the Hispanic vote, why would they deliver it after the election, when their constituents overwhelmingly oppose it?" he said. "Why would House leaders follow the president over a cliff?"
    White House officials insisted the move was not "payback" to Hispanic voters who supported Mr. Bush in greater numbers last week than in 2000. Although the president first proposed relaxing immigration shortly after taking office, he mothballed the idea after September 11, 2001, and downplayed it on the campaign trail.
    "The president has long believed that reforming our immigration system is a high priority," White House deputy press secretary Claire Buchan said yesterday.
    Mr. Stein said Mr. Bush is already a "lame duck president" whose proposal "has no credibility." He expressed astonishment that the president resurrected the plan before pushing other second-term agenda items, like tax simplification or Social Security privatization.
    "There's a sense of obstinacy in the face of overwhelming evidence that it's a losing approach," he said. "I mean, the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing, expecting a different result."
    Though most members of Congress agree on the need for a guest-worker program to fill unwanted jobs, House Republican leaders, including Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Texas Republican, have panned other parts of the president's proposal as an amnesty.
    Mr. Bush has not sent immigration legislation to Congress, though seven bills have been introduced by members of the House and Senate, according to Numbers USA, an organization that lobbies for stricter immigration controls.
    They range from a proposal to give legal status to fewer than 1 million agricultural workers to a bill that could legalize most of the estimated 10 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States. But none of the bills has passed even one chamber.
    Mr. McCain is sponsoring a bill, along with Reps. Jim Kolbe and Jeff Flake, both Arizona Republicans, that would go further than the president's principles by explicitly allowing those now here illegally to enter a guest-worker program and eventually apply for permanent residence.
    White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the president wants to "provide a more humane treatment" of illegal aliens from Mexico.
    "America has always been a welcoming society, and this is a program that will match willing workers with willing employers," he said. "It will promote compassion for workers who right now have no protection."
    He added of Mr. Bush: "It's something that he intends to work with members on to get moving again in the second term. It's something he believes very strongly in."
    Mr. Powell yesterday insisted that security is an important part of his boss's proposal.
    "We must also be innovative in our efforts to stop those who abuse the openness of our societies along the border, who would use this openness to harm our citizens through trafficking in drugs, or trafficking in human beings, or by committing acts of terrorism," Mr. Powell said.
    Some on Capitol Hill said Mr. Bush may be emboldened by the fact that he didn't appear to lose support among conservatives in this year's election, and several Republicans who did support guest-worker programs defeated primary challengers, including Mr. Flake, Mr. Kolbe and Rep. Christopher B. Cannon, Utah Republican.
    "I think a lot of members around the country saw those results and realized that voters are more interested in a serious solution to this problem," said Mr. Flake's spokesman, Matthew Specht. "So I think that certainly improves the chances for reform next year."
    In a 90-minute interview Sept. 22 with editors and reporters of The Washington Times, Mr. Rove said a Bush victory would "be an opportunity" for the president's guest-worker proposal for immigrants, although he declined to call it a "mandate," as he did on such issues as Social Security reform and tax cuts.
    •Stephen Dinan contributed to this report.

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

    At one point I said I believe Bush will stand strong on this issue if he got re-elected because he wouldnt be making policies for votes. Apparently I was mistaken as this cleary shows he is still out fighting on the wrong side of this issue. You can tell that he's probably helping McCain start gaining votes for the 2008 election. If McCain gets the Rep nomination in 2008, this issue may never be resolved. Sorry Rigs :(

    The one hopeful thing in this article is that Bush's proposal will not pass through at this time. But through the years, who knows where this plan will be. Hopefully, our immigration policies will get stricter and not more lax.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    41,588
    Post Thanks / Like
    GW is horribly out of touch with the American people on this issue

    Basically GW and Ted Kennedy have the same position on immigration

  3. #3
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    I hate this policy, BUT... on the good side, I'll take back what I said before about President Bush... he IS trying to reach across the aisle and be diplomatic. I'm just not sure he had to reach THAT far across.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,530
    Post Thanks / Like
    It's amnesty for lawbreakers, no matter how you sell it. Not smart, politically, and against common sense. NOBODY except the illegals themselves want this. They're bankrupting municipalites, they're knocking out the lowest rung of the wage scale and costing student and working poor jobs.

    When you allow and encourage lawbreaking, you get more of it. And after 9/11, are borders are still not secure. And this is Job 1? A mistake, and a big one. DUMB. If the Republicans lose a good chunk of the red South and West soemtime in the future, it started here. If the Dems or a 3rd party wakes up to this fiasco, they'll get barbequed. Asa Hutchinson doesn't do interview anymore because he cannot defend his administration's policy, simply because it's so damn stupid.

    And, As much as I like him, her may be John McCain's epitaph

    "Mr. McCain is sponsoring a bill, along with Reps. Jim Kolbe and Jeff Flake, both Arizona Republicans, that would go further than the president's principles by explicitly allowing those now here illegally to enter a guest-worker program and eventually apply for permanent residence."

    Be a chump and follow the rules. Wait in line if you're from Western Europe, and have something to actually offer this country in the way of skills and education.Heck,wait for damn near ever, even if you intend to speak the language and become American. Good freaking luck!

    But hey-don't speak the language cross the border illegally, have NOTHING to offer, cut the line, have no skills or education and get on the dole. Don't speak the language and don't plan to, nor plan on ever becoming an American. In fact, if you're mexican, complain how you want El Norte to give a good chunk back. Welcome to America!

    I guess the price of lettuce isn't low enough.

    Did these guys smoke crack to celebrate the election?

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Westchester County, NY
    Posts
    3,477
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Bugg[/i]@Nov 10 2004, 10:46 PM
    [b] But hey-don't speak the language cross the border illegally, have NOTHING to offer, cut the line, have no skills or education and get on the dole. Don't speak the language and don't plan to, nor plan on ever becoming an American. In fact, if you're mexican, complain how you want El Norte to give a good chunk back. Welcome to America!
    [/b][/quote]
    and leave nothing, put nothing back into the economy....work here, send the money home-- build a house in another country to return to

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    This is a great and brilliant plan. What ends up happening is companies can legally hire these people and not be forced to pay them that pesky minimum wage thing. Then if they get out-of-line you can have them deported. Indentured servant are a start, but we won't be fully enlightened until we can somehow make slavery legal again. I really feel bad for these corporations who exploit workers, we as tax payers should suffer the burden of supplying them with the cheap labor they so desperatly need.

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Post Thanks / Like
    This is horrible.

  8. #8
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3,142
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][b]Did they smoke crack to celebrate the election?[/b][/quote]

    Appearently, yes. You know what really scuttled Arbusto's initial amnesty plan (outside of a wild conservative backlash) in January?.....Despite over 80% of Americans being against the amnesty plan, Democraps like Gephardt and Daschle (led by LaRaza--"aka The Race") said the plan "didn't go far enough to help illegals" :o ..... If this was different era in history, men like Daschle and Gephardt would either been thrown jail for corruption, or committed to a nut house for observation :wacko:


    [quote][b]"Mr. McCain is sponsoring a bill, along with Reps. Jim Kolbe and Jeff Flake, both Arizona Republicans, that would go further than the president's principles by explicitly allowing those now here illegally to enter a guest-worker program and eventually apply for permanent residence."[/b][/quote]

    McCain and Kolbe just aren't Republicans and both should be sent packing--now!....When Kerry strongly considered McCain to be his runningmate, no more needed to be known about RiNO McCain...

    Kolbe is openly gay and has become more "liberal" since coming out of the closet. His own brother has openly blasted him in the Arizona media for being "out of touch" on the border issue...His brother is a true, gun-totting conservative.

    Flake has some very close relatives, by the way, that are moving (or have moved) from Arizona to Idaho due to illegals trampling their property on a daily basis....Here's another physco: He wants to stop illegal activity by rewarding it :blink:


    [quote][b]A mistake, and a big one. DUMB. If the Republicans lose a good chunk of the red South and West soemtime in the future, it started here.[/b][/quote]

    Back in the mid 1980's a "rising Republican star" named Dan Lundgren (who has gone nowhere) pushed the ill-fated 1986 illegal alien amnesty in congreess to reward farm owners. He also thought (WRONGLY) Mexicans would love the Republicans and put away the Democrats for good with the amnesty.

    [b]Here's reality[/b].....The 1986 amnesty saw 90% of it's new citizens go and register Democrat (mainly in California) and they ushered in the era of the following beauties: Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Boxer, Diane Feinstien---Let's not forget racist Lorretta Sanchez, who used massive voter fraud to trounce conservative icon Bomber Bob Dornan in Orange County :unsure:

    Oh, one more note on the 1986 amnesty: It caused 9-11...Why? [b]One of the "indigent, Mexican farmer workers" that got legal status was the MASTERMIND of the 1993 WTC bombing[/b]...Once Bin Laden saw he couldn't take down the WTC from the bottom in 1993, he hatched the plane hi-jacking scenario.


    [quote][b]This is a great and brilliant plan. What ends up happening is companies can legally hire these people and not be forced to pay them that pesky minimum wage thing. Then if they get out-of-line you can have them deported. Indentured servant are a start, [b]but we won't be fully enlightened until we can somehow make slavery legal again[/b]. I really feel bad for these corporations who exploit workers, we as tax payers should suffer the burden of supplying them with the cheap labor they so desperatly need. [/b][/quote]

    No need to add any thing else. Just a perfect job of articulating the obvious. You have a firm grasp on the issue--as do 78% of rank and file Democrats who are usually against this nonsense.

  9. #9
    TomShane
    Guest
    Relax, people. This is just Bush's way of guaranteeing that all Americans everywhere have affordable access to groomed, manicured lawns for life.

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by TomShane[/i]@Nov 11 2004, 12:03 PM
    [b] Relax, people. This is just Bush's way of guaranteeing that all Americans everywhere have affordable access to groomed, manicured lawns for life. [/b][/quote]
    and clean pools.

  11. #11
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,530
    Post Thanks / Like
    Damn strange-I agree with Sec on this. You're encouraging employers in low skill/no skill labor markets to bypass union and legal workers(entry elvel, parttime, working poor and students) for off-the-books illegals. INS doens't have staff enough now to stop the flow or stop employers from hiring illegals off corner shapeups. Now, you're telling them they'll be no enforcement, just expected compliance. You know how that works-not at all.

    Ah, screw sovreignty-we got cheap tomatoes!

  12. #12
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    6,648
    Post Thanks / Like
    If libs and cons seem to agree on this issue then why is it that politicians are completely off base on it?

  13. #13
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    3,142
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][b]Damn strange-I agree with Sec on this. You're encouraging employers in low skill/no skill labor markets to bypass union and legal workers(entry elvel, parttime, working poor and students) for off-the-books illegals. INS doens't have staff enough now to stop the flow or stop employers from hiring illegals off corner shapeups. Now, you're telling them they'll be no enforcement, just expected compliance. You know how that works-not at all.

    Ah, screw sovreignty-we got cheap tomatoes! [/b][/quote]

    Here's the real question: Up to this point, us tax-payers have been taking it up the a$$ providing for these cheap slaves...If they are legally here, does Bush grant them free-medical care or do companies pick up the burden?...Illegals have caused millions of Americans to lose healthcare in the first place, why would companies want to pick that tab again?


    Please, read this article, and think about our [b]shameful treatment of our veterans in VA hospitals on this day[/b]...almost makes you ashamed to be American:

    [quote][b]Los Angels County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, whose 5th District includes the Antelope Valley, has been proposing a solution to ignoring federal law by immediately deporting illegals: "We have a large number of people breaking the law and having a catastrophic impact on people who live in our communities." [b]Antonovich proposes that the American taxpayer fund construction and staff health care facilities south of the Mexican border. What some are calling a "blatantly stupid and outrageous proposal," Antonovich has indicted interest to his proposal from the State Department and White House.[/b] :huh: :o :wacko:

    [url=http://www.newswithviews.com/NWVexclusive/exclusive53.htm]http://www.newswithviews.com/NWVexclusive/...exclusive53.htm[/url]:[/b][/quote]


    While the U.S might staff Mexican facilities, here's what's going down with Iraq vets in Mich: [url=http://www.detnews.com/2004/politics/0411/08/a01-328300.htm]http://www.detnews.com/2004/politics/0411/.../a01-328300.htm[/url]

  14. #14
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by chiefst2000[/i]@Nov 11 2004, 12:08 PM
    [b] If libs and cons seem to agree on this issue then why is it that politicians are completely off base on it? [/b][/quote]
    I know... of ALL the issues to diplomatically reach across the aisle for! It makes me SO Angry. It actually gives a LEGITIMATE reason to be pissed at Bush.

  15. #15
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Westchester County, NY
    Posts
    3,477
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by chiefst2000[/i]@Nov 11 2004, 11:08 AM
    [b] If libs and cons seem to agree on this issue then why is it that politicians are completely off base on it? [/b][/quote]
    I think it's payback for votes and backroom deals, although this is denied. You'd be surprised (maybe not) that even good politicians find themselves compromised and back to the wall. Maybe politician A has a bill he needs to get thru that's important to him, so he makes a deal with policitican B 'you vote on this issue, I need the opposition vote and I'll vote on this one for you'.....I'm simplifying everything of course, just presenting the idea.

  16. #16
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][b]If libs and cons seem to agree on this issue then why is it that politicians are completely off base on it?
    [/b][/quote]

    This is exactly what I have been trying to explain to you guys forever. Bush does not cater to his base, he caters to his big buisness friends. Yeah sure maybe he will throw you guys a bone once in a while but his true motives are clear to anyone who looks closely. Hopefully, you guys will realize that Iraq really was about controlling energy and not some humanitarian aide effort.

    Republican ideals are not so bad, in my opinion, the problem is the current Republican (aka neo-cons) party does not uphold those values and principles. Your hatred for democrats has blinded you. If you were true Republicans you would support the Libretarians or demand change in the Republican party. All you guys have been saying it is good that Kerry lost because maybe now they will stop being so damn liberal, but the reverse could be said about you guys, maybe if Bush lost the Republicans could take a look in the mirror and realize they are wolves in sheeps clothing. Just my 2 cents.

    Isn't one of the main tenants of the Republican party to be fiscally conservative and small government? Name me one Republican president who has abided by that in recent memory. Sure they may underfund certain programs, but then they spend that money and tons more for tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations, or for wars, or on the military. I'm not saying that military spending is necessarily bad, but you need to look at where they are spending the money and who is dictating the policy. Things like mini-nukes or a missle defense system are not going to make us safer they will simply make the defense contractors richer. They support cheap labor and want to privatize everything.

    The Republicans now have free reign to do pretty much whatever they want. I hope you guys are smart enough to call them out on things when they go too far. You should start a campaign if this or other issues bother you and let them know that you did not vote for this!

    Once again just my 2 cents for whatever its worth.

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Nov 11 2004, 02:25 PM
    [b] Hopefully, you guys will realize that Iraq really was about controlling energy and not some humanitarian aide effort.

    [/b][/quote]
    The war has little to do with controlling energy and everything to do with the war on terrorism... hopefully YOU'RE smart enough to see THAT!

    The dislike of the liberal side of things is only that they are more concerned with power and holding office than they are about actually caring about the country. At least that's the way it seems as an observer.

  18. #18
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][b]The war has little to do with controlling energy and everything to do with the war on terrorism... hopefully YOU'RE smart enough to see THAT!
    [/b][/quote]

    The more you say it doesn't make it any more true.

  19. #19
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1,631
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Nov 11 2004, 03:16 PM
    [b] [quote][b]The war has little to do with controlling energy and everything to do with the war on terrorism... hopefully YOU'RE smart enough to see THAT!
    [/b][/quote]

    The more you say it doesn't make it any more true. [/b][/quote]
    ugh... you're so young and confused. I don't THINK you're stupid enough to that nonsense.

  20. #20
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    Post Thanks / Like
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Enrique Pallazzo+Nov 11 2004, 04:19 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>[b]QUOTE[/b] (Enrique Pallazzo @ Nov 11 2004, 04:19 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Section109Row15[/i]@Nov 11 2004, 03:16 PM
    [b] [quote][b]The war has little to do with controlling energy and everything to do with the war on terrorism... hopefully YOU&#39;RE smart enough to see THAT&#33;
    [/b][/quote]

    The more you say it doesn&#39;t make it any more true. [/b][/quote]
    ugh... you&#39;re so young and confused. I don&#39;t THINK you&#39;re stupid enough to that nonsense. [/b][/quote]
    [quote][b]I don&#39;t THINK you&#39;re stupid enough to that nonsense. [/b][/quote]

    I&#39;m smart enough to know that sentence is nonsense.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us