Jun 01 2007
Noonan’s Nonsense
Peggy Noonan is now blaming Bush for the far right’s three years of attacking moderates and attacking Bush on issues ranging from Miers, to Dubai Ports (another grand example of nativism which cost us cargo container inspection machines across the globe – paid for by our allies in the UAE) and now immigration reform:
President Bush has torn the conservative coalition asunder.
Sorry Peggy, but those who used the word RINO and who would keep the status quo on immigration at any cost (and with lots and lots of vitriol added in) are the ones who tore the conservative coalition apart. Don’t blame Bush. He didn’t accuse Miers of being a closet abortion rights activist, based on the muttering of one David Fromm who apparently had a personal vendetta against Miers. Bush did not go overboard when he allowed a perfectly legtimate business acquisition go forward simpy because the acquiring company was in the Middle East. A country that provides security and port services to our Navy and Marines in one of our largest overseas ports.
And Bush is not the one who will tank a bill that would finally allow us to deport immigrants who commit crimes (no – you cannot do that now since the law doesn’t allow it – which is why the cries to enforce the laws on the books are so naive). Those of us who support the guest worker program have been pilloried, while the far right goes on a hysterical tear claiming we are for open borders (no one is) and voting rights for aliens (no one is). And here is the essence of the insanity from the immigration hypochondriacs. While the Bill we want passed will finally allow us to remove the violent criminal immigrants (legal and illegal) from our streets, it is being held hostage by people who want more than a fine and back taxes from honest hard working people. Yep, that’s right. The bizarre logic on the right is it is beter to let the criminals roam around our streets so we can meet out more punishment on those fixing houses, doing women’s hair, landscaping, watching our children. When confronted with this cold, objective picture the far right goes on an even larger rampage. Don’t believe me? Watch the comments on this post and others.
Right now the far right has lost all credibility. I know droves of conservatives who are turning off talk radio. They can’t take the vitriol and self aggrandizing anymore. Radio microphones do not make one omnipotent. I can predict that the talking heads are going to see a huge drop off in loyal listeners. The fawning fans will still be there in some numbers, but the critical thinkers will have moved on. When a group of people would allow violent criminals even a month more in this country because the fines and penalties for the workers who toil beside us day in and day out is not a severe as they wanted then their priorities are screwed up. And yes, they are NOT doing what is right for America. Anytime we decide to let crime fester we are not doing right for America.
So Peggy, don’t blame Bush. He is still making sense. He would compromise with Dems to secure the border, get rid of criminal aliens and make it easier to find and detect terrorists. It is the far right who would throw all this away for some extra pound of flesh. Just like some liberals want to throw away the NSA monitoring program to get a pound of flesh from Bush. Peggy says Bush broke with them. I am here to say loudly I have broke with them too.
Update: Read more about dumb far right tricks. When you can be counted on to screw things up, then you cannot be counted on to govern well. Clearly the conservative movement that is aligned now repeatedly against Bush is out of gas. Their patience is exhausted and they are tired of compromise because it delays the coming of their perfect world. A vision they did not realize was not shared by all in every detail.
I think Bush Derangement Syndrom (BDS) is reaching around the universe from the far left and is now gripping the far right. I turned off talk radio about threee days ago. No more. You guys lost me as a listener. Time to become an Independent. Enjoy your obscurity.
And Bush is not the one who will tank a bill that would finally allow us to deport immigrants who commit crimes (no – you cannot do that now since the law doesn’t allow it
AJ it appears that you are of the mistaken opinion that this new amnesty bill provides some mechanism for deporting illegals.
I’m betting you have not read the draft bill. If you have, what section and paragraph ‘allow us to deport immigrants who commit crimes’?
Let me ponder this for a minute, say there are 30 million conservatives in the country, including President Bush, and 29 million nine hundred ninty nine thousand nine hundred and ninty nine are against the amnesty bill and President Bush is for it and THEY are abandoning him? interesting angle.
So Peggy, don’t blame Bush. He is still making sense. He would compromise with Dems to secure the border,
How would that occur? This bill certainly wouldn’t do that. Why won’t he compromise with Repubs to secure the border?
The opinion polls sure say this bill has tanked, dead as a hammer.
You make a lot of references to ‘what this bill would do’ it sure would be helpful if occasionally you would actually say what provision in the bill would allow it to ‘do these miraculous things’
Those that have actually read the bill can’t find any miracles in it. Only complete capitulation to the illegals.
Note: this is the opinion of a ‘hardliner’ ( another name for those that want laws enforced) or is it ‘far right’ I get confused.
Peggy says Bush broke with them. I am here to say loudly I have broke with them too.
too? as in ‘also’? So you are saying Bush did break with them? Or did I not interpret that correctly?
AJ, if this bill would “finally” allow us to deport immigrants who commit crimes, under what authority are we doing that every day? Ciminals who have served their time and are illegals are being deported. Are you saying that the DHS is deporting illegals illegally now?
Sorry, AJ, the only one who has lost credibility is you. You don’t use the parts of the bill that would substantiate your claims (or previous laws that back up the absurd thought that we cannot NOW deport criminals) but hand us more vitriol on why we should march lock step with this bill. Would you like to take a guess as to the percentage of criminal deportees have come back into our country?
You on the left of this issue says that these illegals are in the shadows. Do you not have a Home Deport in your town? Are those people standing in the shadows who are trying to find day jobs? What about all those people that are violating your housing standards in your town? They in the shadows as well.
So go right ahead and ignore the fact that if we said that 60% of American kids did not have high school educations we would be hearing, loud and clear, “Washington, we have a problem” yet you seem to have no problem granting amnesty to law breakers from other nations that have never reached the 12th grade level. Tell us about those “family values” you seem to think illegals have when 50% of all Latino children are born out of wedlock. Tell us why there is such a large number of illegals (up to 50% of the prison population) incarcerated in just one state, Calfornia. Please, explain to us how people who have been raised with Pan American values (socialism) are going to suddenly accept our values.
This bill is nothing more than another experiment in social engineering. Please, tell me where that has ever worked before. And then you can explain to us why you think that making an uninvited guest return home is a “punishment”.
The bill talks about hiring 14,000 more Border Patrol. For what? With the very signing of this bill, there will be no more illegals in our nation. And people like the members of the Fort Dix Six will now be legal.
You are a smart man but your common sense has flown the coop on this issue. People who have no respect for our laws when they enter are not all of a sudden going to become respectful just because they can now utilize all the benefits granted to American citizens.
If you want to prove your argument, use facts, not emotion. Use the terminology of the bill itself and see if your opinions hold up. But I am afraid you will be disappointed.
This is ridiculous. I stopped listening to “It’s Bush’s fault” a long time ago. There’s something called “Godwin’s Law” that says the first person to bring up Nazis loses the argument; similarly, the person who starts railing against Bush loses me as a listener. Anything and everything is Bush’s fault, including hurricanes in Louisiana and tidal waves on the other side of the planet, and especially including the behavior of Bush’s supporters, Bush’s ex-supporters, and Bush’s enemies. Gee, Bush-bashers, it must be nice not to have any responsibility for the bile that comes out of your own mouth — after all, Bush is causing it to happen and you have no power to control it.
I’m getting pretty sick and tired of blogs and politics and news in general because of this garbage.
Excellent post. See mine at Called as Seen as well: No peace with Cella.
AJ
You are setting up a stawman that we can’t deport criminals.
Yes we can and do.
The are deported after their sentence because they are illegal aliens.
You don’t need the extra qualifier of having committed a crime.
We deport hundreds of thousands a year, some repeat offenders, so what do you think they are deporting them for, bad eyesight or what?
I don’t think Noonan is right in her assessment either. Noonan is about as far to the right as you can be on many issues. But I do not believe this bill will secure the borders and I do not think that the Dems intend it too.
R05,
I am not saying you should follow us. I am saying you should lose. Be clear here. You wanted this battle – you have it. Facts have no meaning for the immigration hypochondriacs. That is why they believe such silly nonsense as “enforce the laws”. Well, duh – if it was that simply it would be done. Everyone who mouths that demonstrates their ignorance. We cannot deport people for violent crimes – not in the law. We cannot hold employers accountable because there is no repository of checked and cleared immigrants. That is not in the law. We cannot have people work here and NOT gain credit for citizenship. You work here you gain credit. The new law would make temprorary workers ILLEGIBLE for citizenship.
And since you don’t know all this is NOT in the law you have no facts – just fantasies. And all you need to lose.
No FE,
It means your hate of immigrants is not different from a liberals hate of Bush – and personally I don’t support either end of the fringe. It means the new litmus test is: you for or against Bush’s immigration plans. Against? see ya. No vote. None. Ever. I voted for Chuck Robb over Ollie North. I see no reason why a moderate democrat is not heads and tails over a immigrant hypochondriac. Geez, even if you win you lose the Latino vote and will never be able to win elections again anyway. There is no way for your side to win – only lose.
You can me the rat jumping ship – but at least I won’t be the one drowning.
FE,
My asnwer to Peggy is up. We part ways – all of us. No more conservative coaltion until the far right starts respecting others.
Left by AJStrata on June 1st, 2007
AJ: what does this mean exactly?
“We”, who is that? Is that “you”?
“Us”, who is that, is that “Us”, as in your readers, posters, ??
“part ways”? What does that mean, are you going to quit blogging? Are you “mad” at “us”, because we disagree, and attempt to “discuss” this issue with you?
“respecting others”? What does that mean AJ, is that “code speak” for the dreaded “R” word….”RACISM”?
Now you have my dander up a bit!
I just want you to please answer these questions?
Because “we”, people like LE and Bikerken and Apache and MYSELF; because we want the following:
a) respect for our borders
b) respect for our culture and our language
c) respect for our flag
d) respect for our laws
e) the fact we don’t want any Jihadis, or Terrorists or Gang members, or Criminals, or Sexual Offenders, or Murderers, or Rapists, to get a FREE PASS with this bill
f) teh fact that we don’t suddenly want, an additional $2.5 TRILLION dollars in burden, added to the Social Security Administration’s burdern for Taxpayers, because of a sudden, blanket Amnesty for 12 million ILLEGALS!
And just because we want all that, we’re suddenly “BAD” people, and racists?
C’mon AJ; what’s up with that?
Don’t you think that those points that I outlined above, are the MINIMUM, that ALL Americans should WANT?
Did you ever hear me, or anyone else say “deport them ALL, because they have brown skin, and we don’t want them there?”
I’ve never said that, and no one here, has ever said that!
What have I said: “Import the entire damn country of Brazil or China or India or hell, MEXICO” if you want! But, I WANT them here LEGALLY, I want them paying taxes, and I DON’T want them raising the American Flag UPSIDEDOWN, while chanting LARAZA, LARAZA, this is OUT LAND!
If that makes me a “bad” person AJ, if that makes me a “racist”, and I said it yesterday, then fine, I’m a damn Racist!
But AJ, despite my repeated attempts to discuss this with you rationally, you’ve refused!
You refuse to explicity state, your reasons for supporting this “bill”, wholeheartedly, other than making comments about “the right” destroying the Republican party”.
You refuse to answer Apache and LE’s direct question: HAVE YOU READ THE BILL, and do you KNOW what’s IN IT??
Because, IF you have, you would see what they are saying; the Enforcement, and everything else, that you are saying are going to be “okay” because of this bill, IS JUST NOT THERE!
You’ve been “punked” AJ, but it is not by me, nor Bikerken, nor LE, nor Apache; you’ve been Punked by Teddy Kennedy, and John McCain, and by a Bush White House, that doesn’t even know what’s in the damn bill that they are insulting their own party over, and abandoning the very people that have supported him thru thick and thin, over the past 7 years!
I’m not Mad at you AJ, I’m not “screaming” at you in black and white, though I know when you read emails and posts, it looks that way; I’m just absolutely flabbergasted, and perplexed, by your stance on this, and why you say the things you do??
Besides AJ, THIS post, over at Capt’s Blog, plus the link to the Rasmussen Poll, PROVE that what you are saying, and what President Bush are saying, and what Tony Snow etc., are saying, about support for this “compromise” is just NOT correct:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/010051.php
The Rasmussen poll, SHOWS CLEARLY, that Republicans, Democrats, AND Independents, favor ENFORCEMENT FIRST, then to deal with the issue of a Guest Worker program, etc., etc….
Haven’t seen this poll being touted by you, the President, John McCain nor many others recently AJ.
Again, don’t take this personally AJ, I’m NOT attacking you personally at all, but I am a bit perplexed by your vitriol, and apoplexy on this, and then you attempt to turn it around on “us”!
From Britain’s Daily Telegraph via NRO…looks like their immigration debate sounds like ours…
“Given the scale of new arrivals here and the extent to which they are changing our society, the quality of debate over the desirability of this upheaval is miserable. And we all know why. Those who favour open borders have in effect gagged opponents by accusing them of “racism”. You don’t have to be against welcoming newcomers to be smeared as a Nazi sympathiser. You just have to argue that it’s an important matter, with some serious downsides, that deserves proper analysis…Cowed by human-rights campaigners, refugee groups and duplicitous politicians (mainly Labour and Lib Dem), seeking electoral advantage by demonising rivals who propose controlled immigration, we have created a monstrous democratic deficit. “
Aitch748 I don’t understand the point of your comment.
There’s something called “Godwin’s Law†that says the first person to bring up Nazis loses the argument; similarly, the person who starts railing against Bush loses me as a listener. Anything and everything is Bush’s fault, including hurricanes in Louisiana and tidal waves on the other side of the planet,
The first name calling I heard was ‘hardliners’ , ‘far right’ etc. I haven’t, at least on this blog seen anyone call Pres Bush any names. Correct me if that’s not right. I don’t see anyone bashing him either. Just disagreeing with him on an issue is not bashing. I agree with almost everything he does, I admire him, but he’s wrong on illegal immigration and man-made global warming. It doesn’t change my opinion of him. I just don’t see why he supports it, and he won’t say why, no one says why they are for it.. they just call names of the people that are opposed to it. No reasons, no logic, just name calling.
I live in Louisiana, and down here we blame Gov Blanco for the fiasco of Katrina, not the Pres.
Well, maybe I do see why you are getting tired of blogs.
Victor Davis Hanson has an excellent article in the Jewish World Review:
http://jewishworldreview.com/0507/hanson053107.php3
He makes far more strongly the point I hinted at in earlier comments responding to the WSJ editorial board video post: the solution to illegal immigration in the US ultimately lies not at our borders, but in the countries where the people are so desparate to leave.
Enforcing our existing laws and better border control helps, and may even help a good deal, but slowing the flow to a manageable level may ultimately require changes in the source countries. In the meantime, we — and that means all of us individually as well as the government — must be aware that the costs of illegal workers are not fully reflected in their wages and tax payments (to the extent they pay them), but in the vast costs for crime, health care and poverty, and the destruction of our values.
The next time you hire someone to cut your lawn, or do some painting or carpentry, make sure it’s a citizen or legal immigrant (boy did I have a row with my wife about that one – she’s the thrifty one!).
We don’t need mass deportations, what we need is situational enforcement: if an illegal comes to the attention of authorities at any level – from a hospital to a school or a traffic stop – they’re reported and deported. As soon as it’s determined they’re not legal, out they go on the next available flight. Solve the problem one illegal at a time, just as Rudy went after graffitti and street crime in New York.
What troubles me the most in this is that the group using tactics we usually find on the left — charges of racism, nativism and ad hominem attacks on opponents of this particular piece of legislation, is our very own Republican administration and supporters of the bill such as you, AJ.
Without reasoned debate that respects the views of both opponents and proponents of the bill, it will only embitter everyone and create opportunities for the left.
What is undeniably true is that some of the people involved in crafting this bill — specifically LaRaza and MeCHA — have truly anti-American agendas — and it’s undeniably true that some of the opponents may well be nativists or racists.
Reasoned debate means looking at at the actual text of the bill and what it’s likely to accomplish — both the alleged benefits and the alleged burdens and costs. And, frankly, the risks that it will not be implemented effectively in whole.
One point I’ve made, that I have not seen rationally refuted: what gives us any reason to believe that if we make little effective effort to enforce the laws already on the books to secure the border and to deal with illegal aliens now, we will make a greater effort after this bill passes. To the extent the bureaucracy is overwhelmed and unable to deal with illegals now, they will be even more buried after the bill passes – all of the elaborate (but unfunded) provisions for background checks and touch backs and back taxes, etc. will simply be ignored much as current law is ignored.
It’s not nativist or racist to be very concerned that the current situation reflects primarily a challenge to the rule of law, and to believe that the solution to a failure to uphold the rule of law is to change the law to say that which was illegal is now excused and legal.
Without the rule of law, this country cannot survive as we understand it. That is a fundamental truth: we’re not a country of any particular ethnicity or religion, but a country of ideas. And, our fundamental idea is the rule of law as limitation on the power of both elites and the mob. This bill smacks of giving in to a rather large mob.
BTW,
When Noonan and others demand only their portions of the Bill they want to be in and everything else is off the table then it is clear who is fracturing the party. It ain’t those telling the rest of us who support ALL aspects of the bill. So let’s stop with the silliness. The far right stomped its foot and the rest of us said ‘there they go again!”
Also the bill as the draft showed ONLY supposedly makes a path around the LAW of illegally crossing the border or overstaying a visa or whatever method you got here illegally.
It is well known that many now have also committed secondary crimes of false id’s , false social security accounts, so by the new law they would have to be tried and convicted on those other items, rather than just saying we found it out, they are illegals and we can send them home now without having to go through all the dog and pony show to garner the conviction on the secondary effects to toss them out.
I have personally been hit by the social security scams and thankfully it can be adsorbed by me, since I don’t have to depend on it.
1) I am probably not going to live long enough to collect it
2) I have enough income that my social security will be offset so much under the law that my monthly benefit will be almost non existent
I investigated the issue after Social Security contacted me and it seems my number was being used by three other people in California, Texas and Ohio.
Since I lived in Florida, that was a hell of a commute for work each day for all that reported income.
FE,
stop complaining about your feelings being hurt. Where talking immigration and you folks in the way of progress need a label. Get over it.
AJAYYYYY! You’re riled up, and unncessarily attacking FE; he’s never personally attacked you; he has a position, and it’s not yours, and that’s all!
He disagrees with you, as I do, does that make us bad people!
Don’t anyone, say anything you’ll regret on this Blog people…
I save that for all the other Blogs I don’t really like!
Everybody just calm down, we’re having a discussion here, not a knife fight!
I wrote:
It’s not nativist or racist to be very concerned that the current situation reflects primarily a challenge to the rule of law, and to believe that the solution to a failure to uphold the rule of law is to change the law to say that which was illegal is now excused and legal.
Should have said:
It’s not nativist or racist to be very concerned that the current situation reflects primarily a challenge to the rule of law, and to believe that the solution to a failure to uphold the rule of law is NOT to change the law to say that which was illegal is now excused and legal.
AJ
No FE,
It means your hate of immigrants is not different from a liberals hate of Bush
So, you’re as informed on this as you are on the illegal amnesty bill.
I specifically said I have had no bad experience with illegals as Apache, Dale and others have. I hate no ethnicity or race and I do not hate illegal aliens.
and personally I don’t support either end of the fringe.
but you clearly support the illegal aliens, wanting to give them immediate legal rights, which means no deporting, etc.
Against? see ya. No vote. None. What, I lose my vote in the next election? I missed that in the draft bill, but I didn’t miss where the illegal aliens do get the right to vote.
Why do you find it necessary to ‘name call’, why do you find it necessary to resort to threats of ‘not getting a vote’
Can’t you use the terms written in the bill itself to sell it? I haven’t seen you quote one single item from the bill to support your position. I’m gonna guess that’s because you haven’t found any.