Nov 15 2006
Republicans Losing It
Update: Tony Blankley takes a stab at how to proceed as well. Let me say this about conservatism as I see it. It stands for the sanctity of life and the sanctity of this country. Everything else flows from there. Small government? Freedom to live your life. It is not enough to have life, we must be able to express our lives to our individual talents. That is why we strive for minimal government. Enough government to protect and help those in dire straights, but not one that dictates to us what to do. That means Embryonic Stem Cell Research is not something acceptable under broad conservative principles. It is why a guest worker program is acceptable (pay for past digressions, but make a living here as a guest). It is why we cannot fall back from Iraq – we risk bringing the terrorist storm back to our shores. It is why we honor the those who defend this country and do not smear them. All we need to agree on is the broad principles and apply them with compromise among the conservative coalition to win majorities and make progress.
But to make this happen means the hard liners need to climb down off their diases and join the coalition as equals – not superiors. Everyone who is a conservative speaks from the passion of the heart about the sanctity of life and this country. That alone does not make their proposed solutions correct or right. It simply means their heart is in the right place. If we want to organize against rampant liberalism then it can be done as equals in a common cause. Otherwise it is a bunch of useless factions.
end update
It seems the Republicans in the House have decided to push for illegal immigrants to leave the country again.
Some Republicans have expressed reluctance to return Mr. Boehner to leadership after last week’s disastrous elections, and some are opposed to Mr. Pence for forging a compromise on immigration that critics dismissed as “amnesty.” Yesterday, Mr. Pence renounced those efforts.
“All those debates about compromise are a thing of the past,” he said in an interview with talk-radio host Laura Ingraham.
“I reject any form of amnesty, even if we’ve got border security,” he said. “I really reject the idea that people whose first act in this country was a violation of the law ought to be able to get right with the law without leaving the country.”
That’s it for me. You can ‘break the law’ by speeding. There are penalties in the comprehensive proposals, they just do not include ripping people from the homes and families and jobs as punishment. It seems the Reps are trying to punish illegal immigrants for their own screw ups and losses. Typical DC vendetta talk.
Reminds me of how all those brave arm chair warriors pounced on the Dubai Ports International company because they were Arab and Muslim based – a way to punish Arabs and Muslims for 9-11. Even though the company hails from one of our staunchest allies, the United Arab Emirites (UAE). The Rep and their talk show buddies accused these people of all sorts of conspiracies and hidden agendas, when the truth was the company had agreed to pay for state-of-the-art cargo inspection gear AT ALL THEIR PORTS. The company was willing to fund our outer defenses at ports feeding materials to this country. And the Reps decided to punish them in their fit of Rambo-esque play acting.
We have a war to focus on and these people want to spend our limited security forces rounding up people and throwing them over the border. Like I said – good riddence to the Republican House. If that is what they stand for I am out.
Update: In case anyone on the far right is even still listening, here is another analysis that illustrates why doing the same bad things will bring the same bad results. All of this need to punish illegal immigrants has only punished those calling for punishment. The illegal aliens are still here, they are still in an underground economy, there are those amongst them who are violent criminals who should be deported. The hard liners are the ones who lost – who are in essense being punished. When are they going to wake up and realize the punishment is not being applied where they wanted it to be?
Pagar, that was a terrible miscarriage of justice, for some reason I wasn’t able to read the whole article (it wouldn’t scroll down) but my recollection is that the same smugglers had been caught before with lot’s of drugs and released. This was the next time they were caught.
I read the testimony in the case and it sounds like the crooks were the crooks and the BP agents were enforcing the law. I think the only reason they were charged is that they had removed the empty cartridges after the shooting. As if they were trying to cover it up, even tho they actually reported the shooting. Sounds like they had a lot of crooks on the jury.
Retire05
excellent comment. Guess where my name came from.
Me give it a rest????
I could say the same to you.
Those who propose a Comprehensive Immigration Reform based on imposing financial penalties on people who are working “on the books†for six dollars an hour or “off the books†for less than six dollars an hour are either not in contact with reality or are participating in a flimflam. I hope everyone can remember Hillary’s “futures trading†winning days and Tyson Foods losing days that occurred at the same stockbroker’s office? It is amazing how she would be better able to predict the cattle market better than Tyson Foods.
Flimflam:
1. a trick or deception, esp. a swindle or confidence game involving skillful persuasion or clever manipulation of the victim.
2. a piece of nonsense; twaddle; bosh.
3. to trick, deceive, swindle, or cheat.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/flimflam
I feel zero need for punishment of illegal immigrants who have been working for crooked corporations. President Reagan’s Comprehensive Immigration Reform Law does not impose any penalties on illegal immigrants. Deportation of illegal immigrants is not a criminal penalty it is enforcement of the law. Deportation at US Government expense would simply return the illegal immigrant to his or her country. However, Tyson Foods would have to shut it doors if the current immigration law were to be faithfully executed by the President. That is why the law has not been enforced since the last Comprehensive Immigration Reform Law was passed. Because of “anchor babies†that have been born to illegal immigrants since the last Comprehensive Immigration Reform Law was passed and the number of “anchor babies†that will be born after the next Comprehensive Immigration Reform Law, crooked politicians will be able to supply Tyson Foods with an endless supply of wage slaves.
My only “beef†(not to be confused with “no risk†cattle market futures trading) is with the nonsense about economic penalties being placed on people working for six dollars an hour. That which cattle leave on the grass does not stink as much as the “alleged†economic penalties flimflam.
BTW I know a young woman who went to Mexico to get her tubal ligation reversed, the doctor was an American operating right over the border.
I think the point here is that there are people in this country who do not think that Malkin and Tancredo are really that interested in border control. They think they are right wing nut jobs. And refusing to compromise even when you are losing and ending up with nothing only adds to that opinion. That might be one reason why these guys lost. Even in their own part of the world. The MinuteMan candidate can not win in Cochise county for heaven’s sake.
Strata.
Thank you for improving your position on Iraq if only barely perceptibly. This will not prevent me from chuckling audibly at
your small retreat, while you chide others for wanting to “retreat.”
You now say leaving Iraq will “risk” the terror stron coming back to our shores. Before, you drew out the scenario as a faitr accompli!
You had your followers almost bowing to Mecca…
Of course world experts in terror say the opposite,that leaving Iraq will lessen America’s at-home risk, but your training wheels are now firmly affixed–let’s ride….home!
Arriving, we find AJ comparing the Hispanic invasion to
jaywalking. How liberal-humanitarian of this “conservative.”
Next Strata opines that Americans have no companies capable
of overseeing its own ports. How….liberal internationalist of him!
Yes, the invaders are still here and if America ultimately turns into Yugoslavia it will be interesting to see if Strata types strap ’em on, or
witness the inevitable battle from, say, a comfortable balliwack in Costa Rica.
Terrye, I’m not trying to be argumentative, but what is your reasoning and justification for what you said:
“If they had accepted that compromise there would be billions of dollars going into both border security and immigration reform..but because it was not what they wanted it was not worth bothering with and so they killed it..”
They signed a fence bill and appropriated money for it and so far, I haven’t heard of any groundbreaking.
As I said earlier, when they signed Reagan’s bill, it was supposed to solve this problem, it was a compromise bill. Why didn’t it work? what was different about this bill that would ensure it would work.
Wishing and hoping sure won’t do it. There was nothing in the compromise bill that would guarantee it would work any more than any border bill has worked. We have apparently never had border security and I’m not sure we’re ever gonna have any, no matter how much we hope we will.
I’ve said this before, exit polling said immigration had no influence on the outcome of the election. I don’t always believe exit polling, but I have nothing else to go on.
60-70% in polls want a solution to the border. All that means is they want it under control and the immigration problem behind us. It doesn’t mean they are for amnesty or not controlling the border.
Speaking of not rounding people up, what does Malkin intend to do with them all? Firing squad?
Ken, you were a little wrong on one thing in your comment and it was the part in between:
Strata.
and
Left by Ken on November 15th, 2006
You did get the rest right tho. that is you spelled Strata correctly. That’s about it
I tend to agree with Squiggler and Terrye in that I am becoming increasingly disillusioned by the hard right who talk out of both sides of their mouths, however I continue to witness nutrooters that are simply – nuts. The nutters IMO are by far the scarier of the two.
The hard right pundits that strike the “my way or no way” pose alienated many and accomplished exactly what in this election? Nothing. And it will continue to garner them nothing because they have splintered the party. And what is left over will never thrive because the moderates are sick and tired of the far right AND left. The only way to bridge the rift is COMPROMISE. So “My way or No way” will NEVER work.
As for immigration, I think a large part of the problem is that many states do not have to deal with the ACTUAL physical borders. Yes, they have immigration populations, but they do not compare to the populations that are concentrated around the physical borders. I think the portion of the population that is not located near borders, does not think putting up a fence is the answer in light of the fact many illegal immigrants arrive from other countries via airports or seaports.
The people directly adjacent to the borders however, are greatly affected by the problems of unsanitary conditions, criminal elements and infected persons entering the country at will.
The population that does not see the border, is not near it, and rarely gets involved with the immigrants is not concerned enough to vote for extreme measures. The population that has to deal with it every day can not stand it another minute and want extreme measures to happen now.
Again – there has to be compromise. The has to be a common middle ground for there to be progress. Criminal illegals do not constitute the whole immigrant population. To deal extremely with that element and apply it to the whole immigrant population is simply unfair and unethical.
IMO – How can the hard right continue to trumpet crimes by illegals, yet NEVER report on illegals that are law-abiding? Is that not the same thing as reporting only the bad in Iraq and not the good? Isn’t that one of their mainstays? Fair and Balanced?
For Enforcement
You failed to capitalize “t” in “that,” so I can’t fairly exchange
compliments.
Enlightened. (Un)
Here’s a tip in how to become aware:
Don’t call them “hard right pundits” who strike the “my way or
no way pose.” Call them Americans who insist on America
remaining America and their opponents spiritually stateless
creatures who will ultimately choose to be an American
or live , if so, as second class citizens in an entity going by
another name.
FE,
Everyone was for enhancing the border. That has never been the problem. It was those who did not want the rest of the comprehensive package that caused the rift. The hard right could have their fence, and no one else could have anything.
And now the hard right have nothing and the rest of us can have a comprehensive solution (that includes the fence).
Ken,
Is your reading comprehension really this bad? Do you know how people argue when they have inferior positions and inferior ideas? They make up what the other person stating and then argue with their fantasy opposition. Sticking my name next to your delusions don’t make them mine!
LOL! I mean really – is that the level of intellect you have? Strata this and Strata that? Dude, I am very capable of making my own points. You are just arguing with your imaginary little self here. It’s sort of….wierd to read.
Is the digression actually in the past, or is it ongoing? Is crossing the border the illegal act or is residing in this country without following our laws of entry an illegal act?
If someone enters your home and moves into the basement, essentially hidden from view, would you accept some form of compensation as punishment and let them stay in your house?
Unlike speeding, which is punished as a separate and distinct act each time the speeder is caught, punishing someone in this country illegally and then allowing them to stay is nothing short of amnesty; absent amnesty, they continue to break the law just by being here.
If you do not agree that amnesty should be granted, “ripping them from their homes and jobs” is not punishment anymore than kicking someone out of your basement would be punishment; it is correcting a situation that exists as the result of an illegal act. If you steal my car and I take it back, leaving you with no way to get to work, have I punished you?
We need to decide if amnesty is a path we want to take to resolve this situation; that decision should be based upon national interests, not the best interest of the person committing the crime.
If we believe these folks are now a positive addition to our country and should be forgiven (after whatever penalty we deem appropriate), then grant them amnesty and call it what it is.
If we believe they are a security risk or add an additional burden to entitlements such as welfare, then punish them via whatever legal means are appropriate first, prevent them from continuing to break the law by being in this country by removing them, as you would remove someone from your home.
We need to choose a path and then follow it; but let’s not pretend that they are not breaking the law every day that they continue to be in this country. The illegal act did not end as soon as they crossed the border.
enforcement:
My reasoning is that they had a bill that was supported by the majority of the American people and because they decided from the outset that it was crap, they instead demonized the opposition, demonized the president, treated everyone of these illegals like they were serial killing child molestors and shot down any and every viable option.
A compromise bill would no doubt have had things in it that the self annointed like Malkin and Tancredo would not have liked, but it would have put more people on the border and created more facilities to detain people and provided for more security.
But since it was not just what the hard liners wanted it was worthless, or less than worthless..down right dangerous and so after making a huge issue of illegal immigration and destroying any prospect of Republicans getting the legal hispanic vote for God only knows how long…they tried to kill the thing. Our way or nothing. And they were the ones pushing the thing.
I mentioned what I did about Michelle, not because I thought she really wanted to shoot people, but just to make a point…to a lot of people that is how she sounds. Just that hateful.
I am not saying we should ignore the issue, in fact new Democrats like Ellsworth and Webb have made an issue of dealing with the problem. Neither one of them is a liberal. But they have dealt with it in a way that did not alienate so many people. And they won.
Gigw0rld,
Your last post made absolutely no sense. And if you think you can prop up your intellect by playing dictionary I would suggest those kinds of debating tactics simply expose more of how you think than anyone else.
The truth is the payment of back taxes is a very, very tough penalty. If you think the government pinch is high normally, then double it or triple it as you pay of this year’s taxes plus the last 3-5 years in parallel. And it takes years to pay off back taxes.
That is a much higher penalty than most people (obviously) appreciate. Unless you have seen what it can do to someone’s cash flow, I would guess people are just dismissing this penalty out of ignorance.
Retire05,
That is the same dumb argument SteveWS tried to play. You can estimate income for the purposes of restitution.
Geez, you Fence Only types are grasping at thin air now. No way to estimate income for the purposes of repayment? What, you think the IRS doesn’t do this all the time???
No wonder we lost the elections. We can’t envision the simplest things.
Enlightened Sorry but your argument makes exactly the same sense if you argue exactly the opposite of your position. It just depends which side you want to argue it from. for example.
“in that I am becoming increasingly disillusioned by the hard right who talk out of both sides of their mouths, ”
What about the hard left and hard moderates that talk out of both sides of their mouth? I see just as much of that.
and “The hard right pundits that strike the “my way or no way†pose ”
What about the hard left and hard moderate that strike exactly the same pose. You will admit we have all types on this blog and who amongst them are not “my way or no wayâ€? Who do you see willing to compromise? AJ? me? Retire05? Each of us feel we are right and we aren’t willing to compromise.
What about this:”And what is left over will never thrive because the moderates are sick and tired of the far right AND left.”
And the far right and left are not sick of the moderates? They see them as someone not willing to take a stand.
and “IMO – How can the hard right continue to trumpet crimes by illegals, yet NEVER report on illegals that are law-abiding?
and how can the non-hard right continue to believe they are all law-abiding and the ones that are not criminals are so few that it’s not important.
My point is: Everyone thinks they are right on this and are not willing to compromise. I’m gonna say once more, exit polling said immigration had no impact on the election. I’m not sure, but I know it didn’t affect my vote. Keeping Dems out of office was the ONLY thing that impacted my vote.
The “fence” is ambiguous since it does not deal with immigrants that arrive from East Asia, which has the 2nd highest immigration rate into the US.
So why doesn’t the hard right say what they mean? They want to keep MEXICANS out of the US. Illegal MEXICANS that commit a crime while in the US are designated “I told you so” trophies. Illegal MEXICANS that quietly go about their business are by association “I told you so” trophies.
Is that REALLY how Americans want to be portrayed? It is politicizing bigotry, and that is precisely what most conservatives and moderates are patently against.
Folks,
When I refer to the “Bush” comprehensive plan I am not referring to the Senate plan which assumed the House would add the barrier. For the naive in DC ways, the compromise Bills usually draw from both houses so both can claim credit. No one, ever, said the fence should not be part of a comprehensive solution.
And folks, get your own lines. You people who create fantasies out of thin air (like this one regarding the fence) are not insulting my intelligence – hint, hint.
I am looking forward to the comprehensive bill. Just for the fun of watching the hardliners moan and groan. So please, moan and groan. Us wishy, uninformed, RINO, anti-law moderates will be the ones celebrating progress soon enough. And any Democrat who (a) will not pull out of Iraq and (b) sanctify life and (c) be tough on terrorism has my backing. I’ll take a Joe Lieberman any day.
Enforcement – I am a conservative, center right. I am highly disillusioned by my party and some hard right pundits that allegedly speak for my party.
The left is another story that has nothing to do with my disillusionment with my party. IMO the left are a bunch of nutball lunatics that can barely string two words together, much less debate the immigration issue beyond “Vote Democrat”.