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?
Terrye, you said:
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,
I’m not quite sure how you arrived at your conclusion that the comprehensive bill was supported by a majority of the American people.
I think you could make a case that a majority want the illegal immigrant problem solved, but I think support for that bill itself was quite low.
I believe one more section could have been added to the bill that would have gotten it passed.
That provision:
No person shall be granted amnesty as a result of this bill. Anyone desiring citizenship will follow current citizenship application procedures.
Really believe that would have gotten it passed. But we’ll never know.
and you said.
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.
Michelle does get passionate about her positions. I will point out that you do also. I don’t perceive her OR you as hateful.
Ken, thanks for not trying to return the compliment. It’s not something you are capable of.
You been out to Berkeley lately?
To all that want to know how to determine income for back taxes:
6.00 per hour, 1 man, 1 woman, 6 children = zero income tax. Very simple calc. 3 years back taxes at $0 per year is approximately zero.
What that take about 30 seconds to calculate?
For the record I don’t think ANYONE should pay income taxes if they are making 6.00 per hour, even with no dependents.
$240 a week, people can’t live on that.
AJ, why do you continue to label me as a “fence only” proponent? I think the fence is just a start. Stricter enforcement of laws prohibiting the hiring of illegals is another step. Deportation of any illegal whose government doesn’t provide authentic criminal background checks. One more step. But by labeling me as “fence only” you can put me in a neat little catagory that serves your purpose.
And you have not answered my questions.
Do you really think the federal government is going to back bill someone on taxes when they cannot prove how much someone made or how long they have been in this country? Hang on to your hats if they do, because the ACLU is going to have a field day, on your dollar.
Let me see; illegals who are law abiding. Kind of has a nice ring to it, but how can you be ILlegal (not legal and outside the law) AND law abiding? Oh, so it is OK to break one law by entering our nation without permission, but it is not OK to live in AJ’s neighborhood and violate the zoning laws governing the number of people who can live in an apartment. I get it now.
There is an old saying, screw me once, shame on you. Screw me twice, shame on me. We have been screwed, blued and tatooed by unenforced immigration laws before and nothing, not one damn thing has gotten better. The cayotes and the drug runners are becoming more and more dangerous every day. Our Border Patrol is in a war zone. The incursions by Mexican military aiding drug runners is happening more and more frequently. But God forbid, we should build a fence to protect those truly law abiding citizens that had the misfortune to be born in Kennedy County, Texas instead of Philadelphia.
You really have bought into the hype that illegals who do not respect our laws when they enter our nation are all of a sudden going to respect our other laws. Yeah, right.
Barbara Jordan (D-TX) said that immigration was the backbone of our nation but illegal immigration was the bane of our society. Funny, even though she recommended the very things I agree with, nothing was done. And that was in 1996. But then, Clinton was president and Tyson, who put generations of Arkansas families out of work, was a big, BIG contributor to the Bubba Fund.
Immigration should be designed to help the host nation, not to drain it’s society dry. Those of you who advocate amnesty, with or without penalties, do not do so to help the nation hosting the illegals, you do so to help the illegals.
So, are those pressing the amnesty button harking back to Reagan’s failed IRCA? Again – dealing predominently with the Mexican/South American immigrant population. A report 10 years after enactment shows how mis-guided IRCA was. Tax records even then were scarce to non existent, so I question how accurate a plan to pay back taxes could be. Not only that, but the amnesty program caused an unflux of illegals that came to live with their now legal families.
Retire05 did you see my calc on back taxes?
here is a repeat:
To all that want to know how to determine income for back taxes:
6.00 per hour, 1 man, 1 woman, 6 children = zero income tax. Very simple calc. 3 years back taxes at $0 per year is approximately zero.
What that take about 30 seconds to calculate?
For the record I don’t think ANYONE should pay income taxes if they are making 6.00 per hour, even with no dependents.
$240 a week, people can’t live on that.
I would like to point out that in the ‘senate’ comprehensive bill there were a lot of conditions put on illegals to get them to the “legal” category. If they were all enforceable, it would be fine. But unfortunately it was like the former Reagan bill and the fence bill. Nothing enforceable in it. What makes any bill enforceable or not is if money is appropriated to pay for it. And whether anyone wants it enforced or not. Even with appropriated money, I’m not sure any fence is gonna get built.
The congress withheld funding for the troops in VietNam so we had to pull them out, even without a resolution calling for them to be pulled out. So money is the trick. What killed the senate bill IMHO is that it was perceived as an unconditional amnesty for all (whether it was or not, it was perceived as such) If it had stated NO AMNESTY I think it would’ve flown.
Enlightened, for me, the fence is a “keep everyone out that don’t belong here” issue. Every single person in Mexico(and I don’t limit this to Mexicans) can come to the border patrol at a checkpoint, say they are visiting and drive right in. Why do they need to cross in the desert? If they come across the border, we know they are here. That’s the legal way.
And the problem with this is?
There is a realignment taking place in the republican party…and maybe in the dem party(only because Hill wants to win in ’08, it’s not really an idealogical change, imho…unless some conservative dems are trying to take their party back FROM the clintons…)
Anyway, the republicans are split because of the Bucananites/tancredo-ites who are isolationists…not winners in either party,imho…but are trying to hijack a party for their agenda…very interesting time in politics…
George is going to make things happen for the betterment of the country…in spite of the hard-headed buchanan/tancredo “know-it-alls”, imho….and I am glad for it.
Walk a mile in their shoes before you tell their story from your side of the fence.
They have entered the US illegally because the US has enabled them to do so.
They are not cattle, the US cannot simply say “we wanted you before but don’t want you now”, and expect to retain any credibilty.
And the more the US taunts them with “fences” the more will enter as soon as possible so that when an amnesty compromise is enacted they benefit from that too.
Only when their options in the US are not better than what they are offered in their own country will they stop illegally crossing the border for a better life. A fence is not going to stop them.
Strata
I know exactly what you mean by making us what the other person is saying. Like when you say the get out of Iraq proponents are
deamnding we “surrender Iraq to alQaeda,” dude.
I don’t find this tactic on your part “weird” though. I find it
dishonest and cavalierly soaked in US soldiers’ blood. Arguments
of this straw man kind are already responsible for delaying the inevitable exit about a year at the least.
Enlightened, but I thought there was no ‘amnesty” in this bill?
” US taunts them with “fences†the more will enter as soon as possible so that when an amnesty compromise is enacted they benefit from that too.
Only when their options in the US are not better than what they are offered in their own country will they stop illegally crossing the border for a better life. A fence is not going to stop them.” And the reason why a fence won’t stop them, is………….taa daa. there is NO fence.
Ken, I was gonna respond to your comment just above, but there wasn’t anything but drivel in it. Please say something comprehensible. Or just stay quite. Well, actually from you that would be the same thing. . …………………
Unintended irony on your part, For Enforcement , that you waste space with tautological trivia then reveal your inability to grasp
Strata’s hypocritical critique of me.
Enforcement – The bill will not progress without some type of amnesty whether it is framed as such or not.
It is an impossible undertaking to track down illegals and simply kick them out. I can’t fathom why extremists think it’s a viable option.
In my opinion, extremists from both sides of the aisle are fantasizing the solution to this problem, which has been occurring in the US now for many many years.
Closing the borders and becoming an isolationist country only perpetuates the citizens abject fear of humanity. I can’t abide that intolerance.
Leaving the borders open with the promise of big $, better healthcare, minimum taxes, welfare, free abortions, low-interest home and car loans and the litany of leftwing “immigrant rights” thanks to the ACLU has forced our country to assume the mantel of intolerance because the illegals have abused their privileges as guests in our country . I can’t abide illegals having more rights than legal citizens.
So, like I said before – when the US decides that illegal immigrants are not equal to legal citizens, and stops offering a better life to illegal immigrants than what they can get in their own country – the influx will not subside. Not with a fence, not with amnesty – just not.
Since American companies continue to hire illegals – they will keep coming.
Since healthcare companies continue to offer illegals insurance – they will keep coming.
Since the US will allow illegals to birth their child on American soil to instant citizenship – they will keep coming.
Since the black market for illegal ID’s is flourishing – they will keep coming.
Since the ACLU will continue to frame the “civil rights” of non-citizens – they will keep coming.
The speeding analogy is one of my favorite arguments when it comes to attempting to deal with dogmatic anti-immigration conservative bigots. They are embarassing the whole GOP.
The thing that disturbs me most about ’rounding up’ illegals – please note the dehumanizing term ’rounding up’ which is used for cattle and illegal Hispanic human beings. The thing that disturbs me most is this whole confiscation law. Any illegal who is caught must forfeit all their belongs to various law enforcement agencies. To me this is criminal. But, who am I to make such a statement. All these people are – the fact that they are Spanish speaking illegal human beings who need to be rounded up like cattle – well, they broke the law so they deserve to have everything – all humanity stripped from them.
Too bad they are not Islamic enemy combatants. Then, they would be afforded a few considerations. Oh, I forgot, they are Hispanic, Catholic, breed like rats, and want to take the Southwest back for Mexico, so they deserve no rights, considerations, or decent treatment.
I forgot to add diseased.
To me this has the rank odor of bigotry and racism. Because they are Hispanic, speak Spanish, are Mexican, and came over a border that was completely opened to them until 1929 when the KKK pushed our first immigration laws through Congress they have no rights. Everything they worked for can be stripped away, basically stolen by the law enforcement agencies empowered to protect us from all evil.
Sorry, I get very angry over this issue.
The Pink Flamingo
Ken,Strata’s hypocritical critique of me.
It wasn’t that I couldn’t understand that. It was your attempted defense of his critique. Key word, ‘attempted’
Enlightened you said;
The bill will not progress without some type of amnesty whether it is framed as such or not.
It is an impossible undertaking to track down illegals and simply kick them out. I can’t fathom why extremists think it’s a viable option.
In my opinion, extremists from both sides of the aisle are fantasizing the solution to this problem, which has been occurring in the US now for many many years.
and I say: The reason it didn’t go anywhere is it was intended primarily as an unconditional amnesty vehicle.
I don’t think any, except known terrorists, should be tracked down. Law enforcement, not hiring illegals, no benefits, that kinda action will take care of all that haven’t become legal over time.
And the fantasys will not end. There will be NO solution to the illegal immigrant issue. No one(with the ability to do something about it) genuinely wants anything done. So it won’t be.
Right FE. America eventually will find sizeable numbers of its own ethnic groups on the move…like ethnically cleansed Shia and Sunni
are on the move in Iraq–if they can still move.
FE, I totally understand about the $6.00 an hour theory. But I am sorry, anyone making $6.00 an hour should pay some taxes. You don’t care about something you have not invested in. Case in point: you give your 16 year old a car. They run the wheels off it, never change the oil, and the floorboard is covered in Big Gulp cartons. The next thing you know the car needs a new engine and the kid has no money (spent all on Big Gulps and video games). Then when you tell the kid “nope, I bought you one car and you didn’t take care of it, I’m not buying you another. You buy the next one” things change. When the kid has to pay for a car, make sure it keeps running by changing the oil and has some personal labor involved in it’s ownership, things change. Think I am wrong? Look at welfare housing. You can put people in brand new housing and because they don’t own any interest in it and didn’t have to pay for it, five years later it is in ruins. But give people a vested interest in that housing and watch things change. Look at the Cochran Gardens Apartments in St. Louis. State of the arts in multi-family housing for low income. Five years after it was built it was drug city, the toilets had been stolen and it was a total disaster. Residents were then given control over those apartments, a partial ownership and wholla! the place became a model used all across the nation. The philosophy of sweat equity works.
I think everyone has forgotten the real reason for more border security was to keep the terrorists out. Next to keep the drug runners out, but the terrrorists most of all .
That said, contrary to what some people think, illegals are taking jobs Americans will do, contruction is an example. It is a fallacy to say they are not. They have taken over the construction industry in many states. These are the jobs boys getting out of high school want and need and a good many of these kids make the construction industry their life work. Unemployment does not take into consideration these kids not having jobs because they cannot collect unemployment and are not registered as unemployed.
Another thing is I don’t want them voting in our elections. I think they have a real nerve to do so. This shows that these people who illegally vote have no respect for our laws or for the citizens of this country and should be deported regardless of any other considerations and in lieu of jail. Everyone talks about it being a crime for being in this country illegally, but voting in our elections is a real crime with real jail time. Something needs to be done about this, but the democrats will not do anything. These people are more voters for them.
And I for one did not like to see our flag upside down under the Mexican flag in the recent protests in our own country. This shows a disrespect that I think these people are incapable of understanding.
I am not worried that companies will have to raise their prices or not making as big a profit for their goods or services because they have to pay the going wage and social security taxes. Why should they be able to make more profit or undercut law abiding companies? I am a fence first because I don’t see how we can make any progress when illegals can just come back after they have been deported over and over again. Also, the tide must be stemmed at some point.
I am also against them getting welfare, food stamps, free hospital and medical care, free elementary and high school education, and in state college tuition. These are things they can’t get in their own country so why should we pay for them to get these things here. Some of our states are going bankrupt trying to cope with the influx of these people . What is going to happen to our own children’s education when the teacher is faced with the language barrier these illegal children present? The teacher will spend more time with these illegals than with our own children and our own children will be cheated out a good education .
We simply cannot take in all the indigents from Mexico and support them. It simply cannot be done. We cannot save the world. And as far as the ACLU is concerned it should be against the law to sue the government because of deportation of an illegal. They should never have been here in the first place and so have no case when deported.
I used to think that the people who have been here a long time would have their lives disrupted if they were forced to leave but I have changed my mind. They stayed long enough on our dime. And the anchor baby clause should be interpreted as babies born to American citizens. Babies of illegal or legal aliens should have to go through the process of gaining citizenship just like their parents did. Until they do they should not be called American citizens. That would eliminate illegals coming to this country to have their babies. I wonder who interpreted the law this way in the first place. Someone had to have parsed the language of the law to come to this conclusion.
I fear that with so many coming at the same time they will have a diverse effect on our culture and the non assimulation will be the downfall of our country as we know it. I get so mad when calling some facility and being asked if I want English or Spanish. And madder still when the subject comes up of what should be the official language. Anyone coming to this country is supposed to adjust to our culture and laws and not keep to the ones of their former country. And dual citizenship should be abolished. You cannot have mixed loyalties and call yourself an American. If an immagrant is unwilling to give up citizenship of their former country or fail to assimilate they should be sent back to their former country.
Retire05 I certainly buy the ownership thing. But after Social Security alone, take home pay with nothing else deducted would be 222.84. that’s only 11599 year. I’m pretty sure that is in the no tax due range. My grandson, going to college takes about $200 spending (food,gas,etc) weekly, 285 month rent 85 utilities month and I pay his car payment and insurance and he is broke. So I don’t know how somebody raising kids with a family is gonna get by.
I’m not for any of those breaks that they want to give the illegals. They ought to get USA benefits just like everyone else that are not US citizens. (NONE)
Barbara – Many people agree with your points, and your frustration and anger. It is why this issue needs to be addressed, and not in another ten years – or even two for that matter.
But for my own peace of mind, I cannot treat other human beings worse than I would expect to be treated.
I cannot supoort deporting a 70 year old man, his wife, his kids his grandkids etc. that have: paid and are still paying taxes, speak English, are educated, have served in our military, have never voted, have paid off a 30 year mortgage and have paid into their own medical and life insurances.
I also cannot support a 20 year-old welfare mother, crack head whore, popping out her 4th American kid, no education, no personal hygeine, no job, that just spent the rest of her FEMA check on a 60 inch TV. She is much more an example of being on the US “dime”.
My point is that the issue has many facets, and I agree with GWB – HUMAN lives are at stake. There are crap humans in every city in America. And there are exemplary humans.
I cannot justify destroying a life to appease isolationists. There are many “bad” illegals – but there are considerably more “good” illegals.
Whatever happened to treating our fellow humans with compassion?
Enlightened, excuse me? Have served in our military? Since when do we allow illegals into the military. While it is true that the military does accept foreign born into their ranks, one has to be LEGAL to join any branch of service. That was just another talking point on your part. One that you were not informed on.
As to the crack whore, I fully understand. But does that mean that we have to support other nation’s crack whores? And remember, she is OUR crack whore and we are responsible for her, unless you would like to ship her out to Mexico and make them responsible for her. And yes, while the majority of illegals are hard working people, many are not. And pardon me if I don’t agree with importing crime. We have plenty of our own to go around.
Should we start letting people in for no other reason than they come from a crappy nation? What about Darfur? How about Uganda? Do you want to go get every citizen from those areas that are poor and oppressed and bring them here so you can feel good about your “human compassion”?
No one is talking about treating illegals badly. No one has suggested we tie them to a post and whip them or load them on cattle cars like so much meat and ship them out. We are talking about making people responsible for their own actions (a belief that seems foreign to some of you) and making them return to their own nation to apply for legal entry into ours.
And don’t give me that crap about how we are above all that. How inhumane it would be to send them home. IT IS THEIR HOME. And if their governments are not the way they should be, or any nation’s goverment is not the way it should be for the sake of their own people, it is not our responsibility to load all those people on boats and planes and bring them to America so they have a better life. It is their responsibility to learn the lesson we taught in 1776.
Or should we just invade Mexico and whip them up into shape until we end the corruption that has dogged that country for centuries and made it the trash heap it is today?
One thing people forget about Illegal voting in our elections is this: Robert K. Dornan. Wayyyy back in 1996, he was able to PROVE over 7,000 Illegals voted in his election against Loretta Sanchez Brixi.
No, he wasn’t. He was able to prove that 748 illegal votes were cast–and that is from all sources, including U.S. citizens convicted of felonies who should not have been allowed to register to vote, straw address registrations, invalid address registrations, et cetera, not just aliens, illegal or legal. He lost by 984 votes after a recount. 748 is less than 984, resulting in being 236 votes short, and that presumes that all 748 illegal votes went to Sanchez. Dornan lost that election because he went on a vanity campaign for President while running for re-election in a district that was majority Democrat the entire time, not because of illegal aliens. He started thinking that he had some sort of divine right to the seat. He didn’t.