Rudy backs slowly away from the amnesty abyss — or does he?

posted at 3:43 pm on May 22, 2007 by Allahpundit

Last Thursday’s prediction: “Expect Rudy to pronounce himself ‘troubled’ by the deal.” Today: he’s troubled. But on what score?

At an event Monday in New York City, Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani said he did not support the “present version” of congress’ Immigration Bill.

The former New York Mayor said he would like for there to be a system or database that would allow the government to “know everybody who is in the United States, who comes here from a foreign country”.

“If you make that your goal then everything follows from that or leads to that,” he added. “There should be a tamper proof id card, biometric id card that everyone who comes here from a foreign country should have. In order to make sure you identify everyone, in order to be secure.”

Clearly that can’t be the crux of his plan, though, given that (a) what he’s talking about is considerably more lenient than the new bill, which at least imposes token penalties on illegals, and (b) per the White House fact sheet, the bill already contains something along these lines:

Illegal immigrants who come out of the shadows will be given probationary status. Once the border security and enforcement benchmarks are met, they must pass a background check, remain employed, maintain a clean criminal record, pay a $1,000 fine, and receive a counterfeit-proof biometric card to apply for a work visa or “Z visa.” Some years later, these Z visa holders will be eligible to apply for a green card, but only after paying an additional $4,000 fine; completing accelerated English requirements; getting in line while the current backlog clears; returning to their home country to file their green card application; and demonstrating merit under the merit-based system.

Anything more to his plan than what he mentioned? A quick check of the campaign’s “On the Issues” page predictably reveals squat. It sounds like he’s trying to turn this into a pure national-security issue, which conveniently plays to his strengths while ignoring the fact that keeping out terrorists is only half the equation. The rest of it is the political and economic question of what happens when you absorb massive numbers of mostly unskilled, unassimilated people. Rudy’s apparent answer: just make sure they have ID. Thanks for the input, buddy.

And so I edge ever closer to declaring my support for Mitt.

While we’re talking Rudy, InstaGlenn linked this Gallup poll about gun owners defecting from Giuliani to Fred — but only in small numbers (so far). 32% of all Republicans support Giuliani while 12% support Thompson; among gun owners the split is 26/18. I’m suspicious, though, about how much of that is due to their respective positions on the issue versus regional biases. Check the breakdown among Democrats and you’ll find that Edwards’s support increases most sharply among gun owners, from 12% among all Democrats to 17% among arms aficionados. Edwards does support the Second Amendment but he hasn’t made any kind of issue out of it; it may be that what we’re seeing here isn’t so much support from gun owners as greater support from southerners for the “southern” candidates, and since southerners are more likely to own guns it shows up here as “gun owners.”

Anyway. First up in the immigration debate: scaling back or getting rid of the temporary worker program, which businesses are relying on for quasi-slave labor. Blue Dogs like Byron Dorgan oppose it because it suppresses American wages; others appear to oppose it because they want to make those temporary workers permanent. We’re recording C-SPAN2 around the clock. Fun stuff.

Update: I saw this earlier at Ace’s but forgot about it. Kid from Brooklyn just e-mailed to remind me. Here’s how the Democrats are rewarding black voters for years of supporting them in numbers greater than 90%.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Its because Gun Owners aren’t all one issue voters, for starters, plus Rudy’s basically promised to keep his grubby paws off their guns, Mitt hasn’t and in fact just declared he’d support a new Spooky Weapons Ban, and McCain’s a douche who everyone hates. Fred! isn’t getting wide MSM coverage because he hasn’t thrown the hat in the ring officially, so people who aren’t active online or in comservative politics are less likely to know about him and his candidacy.

Bad Candy on May 22, 2007 at 3:51 PM

rudy is dead to me after this whole border thing. He has not demonstrated to me that he understands the war on terror is more than just talking tough and bombing/fighting terrorists. He doesn’t understand the 2nd amendment nor the border problem…and his actions speak louder than words.

I think we’ll see his star status decline in the coming months as people begin to see him for how weak he is.

Highrise on May 22, 2007 at 3:52 PM

bad candy.

Promises don’t mean shit anymore.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Highrise on May 22, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Rudy’s starting to sound like a bald transvestite McCain.

Iblis on May 22, 2007 at 3:53 PM

I think it was the FNC debates that Mitt said he’d support a ban. Rudy has said he’d take a state and local rights position, and hasn’t changed that AFAIK.

Bad Candy on May 22, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Promises mean zero anymore.

It’s too crucial…if you gonna talk the talk, you better have previously Walked the WALK.

Highrise on May 22, 2007 at 3:54 PM

Atleast Rudy isnt

laying on his deathbed to make suire Illegals can vote

William Amos on May 22, 2007 at 3:54 PM

Mitt hasn’t and in fact just declared he’d support a new Spooky Weapons Ban
Bad Candy on May 22, 2007 at 3:51 PM

If this is so I can never support Mitt, damn.

liberrocky on May 22, 2007 at 3:55 PM

And so I edge ever closer to declaring my support for Mitt.

B-but–Fred! FRED! Remember, the whole point of Fred! is to treat him like he’s actually running.

Alex K on May 22, 2007 at 3:55 PM

Mitt hasn’t and in fact just declared he’d support a new Spooky Weapons Ban
Bad Candy on May 22, 2007 at 3:51 PM

Yup he said it…Sorry Mitt nice knowing ya.

liberrocky on May 22, 2007 at 3:58 PM

Clearly that can’t be the crux of his plan, though, given that (a) what he’s talking about is considerably more lenient than the new bill, which at least imposes token penalties on illegals, and (b) per the White House fact sheet, the bill already contains something along these lines:

It also says that nothing will be done about the citizenship until the border is secure, which is a lie. Illegals will be eligible for probationary Z visa, including being able to work legally, unless the DHS can run fingerprint checks, background checks, find and document a reason for the alien not to get the Z visa, within 1 business day.

You’re trusting what the White House fact sheet says, about immigration? Just yesterday you (or someone here) linked to Redstate’s debunking of the Myth vs. Fact sheet. Bluey debunked most of what the White House wrote.

amerpundit on May 22, 2007 at 4:01 PM

Rudy, I think, is staking out some middle ground in which the people that end up in the states have done things properly and the people who haven’t are given the boot.

I don’t think a guy who watched his city burn because of crappy enforcement of pre-existing laws is willing to open the floodgates.

Krydor on May 22, 2007 at 4:05 PM

Does anybody else think that Rudy is a bit too much like an airport windsock?

Speakup on May 22, 2007 at 4:07 PM

krydor,

He’s not for closing them either.

Highrise on May 22, 2007 at 4:08 PM

Allah, I don’t quite understand. Rudy says that he doesn’t like the current bill. He thinks it doesn’t do enough for national security. He wants to be able to further document possible terror risks in this country. He wants to do all of that, before anything else. What’s the problem?

Let’s face reality, here. We’re not going to deport 12 million people. We’d have to find them. Despite what I’ve said in the past, one thing came through this week – no matter who you elect, they’ll cave to their colleagues – over their citizens. At the beginning of yesterday, only 20-30 Senators were expected to vote to cloture. 69 did.

In all seriousness, whether President Bush was there or not, Kennedy, Martinez and crew would’ve done the same thing – possible worse. So, say Bush vetoed it. Yesterday, the open-borders bunch had enough votes to override.

amerpundit on May 22, 2007 at 4:09 PM

Highrise on May 22, 2007 at 4:08 PM

He hasn’t specified his position on that. All he’s said is he wants national security first, and the bordered secured, before anything else.

amerpundit on May 22, 2007 at 4:10 PM

OT, but related to next president topic – Michelle Obama thinks that just because her husband can put up with a “loud mouth” which she states that she is, he’s fit to be president of the free world. The terrorists are nothing compared to her. Big mouth alright!

She also believes the next president will be sworn in in ’08.

…he’ll be the next president of the United States and… we will be swearing him in ’08.”

Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 4:14 PM

Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 4:14 PM

Wishful thinking on her part.

amerpundit on May 22, 2007 at 4:18 PM

How long will it take to secure the borders and aren’t we giving amnesty if we secure the borders first and that is all we do? What should we do in conjuction with securing the borders.

tomas on May 22, 2007 at 4:18 PM

wishful thinking exit question: Is the president setting this up to be an issue for 2008 election, to give the GOP nominee the upperhand(assuming its Romney, Thompson or Rudy?)

jp on May 22, 2007 at 4:19 PM

Memorial Day week-long time off for our so-called representatives won’t be fun for any of them. They have no idea what their constituents, from all sides, have in store for them, unless they hide the entire times in their cellars.

Watch Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, who’s also married to the Secretary of Labor Elaine L. Chao. He is totally in favor of this bill and has much to say about it. Note the blatant conflict of interest. Much light needs to be shined on this one.

Entelechy on May 22, 2007 at 4:24 PM

Update: I saw this earlier at Ace’s but forgot about it. Kid from Brooklyn just e-mailed to remind me. Here’s how the Democrats are rewarding black voters for years of supporting them in numbers greater than 90%.

Yep. And black people will continue to vote for Democrats in record numbers. They’re just not getting it.

PRCalDude on May 22, 2007 at 4:32 PM

And black people will continue to vote for Democrats in record numbers.

they voted GOP by about 75% or so until LBJ’s “great society” payoff, went back to civil war perceptions. the dems try to lie and claim it was over civil rights and ignore all the dems that were against civil rights and a larger(percentage) of gop in favor.

I think this is the big worry of GOP with this, that its perceived they aren’t for the immigrants in whatever sense and they end up voting 90/10 dems like the black voting block does today.

jp on May 22, 2007 at 4:37 PM

wishful thinking exit question: Is the president setting this up to be an issue for 2008 election, to give the GOP nominee the upperhand(assuming its Romney, Thompson or Rudy?)

jp on May 22, 2007 at 4:19 PM

Doesn’t appear that the current Pres. gives a crap about who comes after him other than he may hope that they are worse.

Speakup on May 22, 2007 at 4:38 PM

Even though Rudy has a tough stance on terrorists, I was never going to vote for him because of the illegal situation. If we can’t secure our borders, talking tough on terrorists is a joke. Don’t forget the Duka Brothers.

I also plan not to vote for local politicians strictly on their stance of laws not being enforced when it comes to illegals.

moonsbreath on May 22, 2007 at 4:39 PM

Doesn’t appear that the current Pres. gives a crap about who comes after him other than he may hope that they are worse.

Speakup on May 22, 2007 at 4:38 PM

yep, which means if my wishful thinking is right he’s one slick politician. i’m probably wrong though.

If nothing comes of this other than the debate, I may start beleiving this was all an 08 election setup to give the public and importantly the Moderates something to focus on other than Iraq. And force the dems to confront their open border views.

/optimism

jp on May 22, 2007 at 4:43 PM

Face it. Only way we get the illegal situation under control is for EVERYONE to have a National ID card.

Tie it to work, SSN, the vote, drivers license, FBI database, and Make it your Passport.

Its time to bite the bullet on this one.

Romeo13 on May 22, 2007 at 5:17 PM

Romeo13 on May 22, 2007 at 5:17 PM

what will we do with the kid that gets National ID card: 666

jp on May 22, 2007 at 5:21 PM

This to me, far more than his position on abortion, is Rudy’s achilles heel in the Republican race and is the #1 reason why I can’t support him in the primaries. His past support for NYC’s sanctuary city policy is a cloud that hangs over his campaign, and the current fight over the amnesty bill serves to highlight his weakness in that area.

I’ll give him my vote in the general if he gets the nomination since he’ll be better than anything the dems have to offer, but I’ll be disappointed nevertheless

thirteen28 on May 22, 2007 at 5:25 PM

amerpundit,

Let’s face reality, here. We’re not going to deport 12 million people. We’d have to find them.

There is no justifible reason that we cant, just cowardice.

Then on June 17, 1954, what was called “Operation Wetback” began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.

By mid-July, the crackdown extended northward into Utah, Nevada, and Idaho, and eastward to Texas.

By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 illegals had left the Lone Star State voluntarily.

Unlike today, Mexicans caught in the roundup were not simply released at the border, where they could easily reenter the US. To discourage their return, Swing arranged for buses and trains to take many aliens deep within Mexico before being set free.

Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.

The sea voyage was “a rough trip, and they did not like it,” says Don Coppock, who worked his way up from Border Patrolman in 1941 to eventually head the Border Patrol from 1960 to 1973.

Mr. Coppock says he “cannot understand why [President] Bush let [today's] problem get away from him as it has. I guess it was his compassionate conservatism, and trying to please [Mexican President] Vincente Fox.”

There are now said to be 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens in the US. Of the Mexicans who live here, an estimated 85 percent are here illegally.


Operation Wetback….

doriangrey on May 22, 2007 at 5:44 PM

There is only one issue right now that I am using as a litmus test. That one issue is illegal immigration. Or why don’t we just call it law enforcement. Any candidate who is against the enforcement of the law I will fight tooth and nail to keep out of office. Rudy, you are not impressing me in this regard yet. Your hesitation to say what is just worries me.

Zetterson on May 22, 2007 at 5:48 PM

yep, which means if my wishful thinking is right he’s one slick politician. i’m probably wrong though.

OH…wish on, George Bush is fulfilling his manifest destiny, not his oath of office.

If by some chance immigration re(conquest)form to suit him can’t be had through Congress, expect that he will fulfill remanifest destiny, by executive order.

Speakup on May 22, 2007 at 6:01 PM

doriangrey on May 22, 2007 at 5:44 PM

agreed.

These people carrying on with the mantra that we can’t deport them are just not wanting to see that it can be done in steps.

If the congress wanted to be taken seriously..or giuliani for that matter, they’d do a number of things first and it would cut it down tremendously:

*put up the damn wall that was already voted on..but not funded

*increase our border patrol agents and FUND them this time..and for god’s sake..put sutton out of a job (yeah right)

*Feds punish severely states that harbor sanctuary cities

*punish businesses that hire illegals..it gets around who looks for illegals and where they pick them up at..it isn’t ALL about illegal documentation either. In california, some businesses don’t even require showing documentation. Hell, in Washington state I couldn’t do jack without showing all my documentation.

*stop giving babies born to illegals American Citizenship

Highrise on May 22, 2007 at 6:06 PM

And giuliani is VERY weak on the border issue..something to think about if you are one who touts he is Da Man for the war on terror.

Highrise on May 22, 2007 at 6:07 PM

Rudy is now and always has been pro-illegal. He re-instated and supported the “sanctuary city” law in NYC, and even sued the federal government to keep it. In other words, he actively prevented local officials from reporting illegals to the feds. So much for his national security credentials.

As far as I can tell, Rudy’s position on immigration is about the same as Bush’s, McCain’s or Hillary’s. Add pro-amnesty and anti-enforcement to being pro-abortion and anti-gun.

As far as his objection to the bill, the best he can come up with is to nitpick the ID and record keeping requirements- the amnesty provisions that come before enforcement and security (that probably wouldn’t happen anyways)? Rudy seems to have no problem with it.

Hollowpoint on May 22, 2007 at 6:35 PM

The premise that we can’t find and deport 12 million (20 million, 30 million etc.) illegals doesn’t jibe with the fact that what everyone proposes includes and is based on finding and doing background checks (a multi decade process by my estimation)on those same illegals! I’ll submit we should just give all terrorists amnesty and bring them in from the shadows because we can’t possibly stop every terrorist attack or find and imprison / kill every terrorist. That IS the lefts position on the GWOT and the neocon position on illegals. It is a BS argument because in all actuality ridding this country of every illegal alien / visa overstay would be a simple process taken over time. To me Rudy is looking like a Bush clone on both the GWOT and illegal immigration and thats not a good thing for the party or for America. I’m thinking that Hunter and Tancredo look better every day.

Buzzy on May 22, 2007 at 9:02 PM

Tancredo and Hunter both know what they think about the borders, immigration and the global jihadist threat.

Few of the rest seem able to do more than tapdance to the latest leading winds.

As if they don’t really believe that a country with no borders is no country.

profitsbeard on May 22, 2007 at 9:46 PM

Buzzy-

Like minds thinking great.

(Didn’t read your post before I posted, but, except for the candidate sequence, a nice harmony.)

profitsbeard on May 22, 2007 at 9:47 PM

No Rudies! No RINOs in the whitehouse!

paulsur on May 23, 2007 at 12:06 AM

Yep. And black people will continue to vote for Democrats in record numbers. They’re just not getting it.

PRCalDude on May 22, 2007 at 4:32 PM

But they do get it. That is why any bill that looks like amnesty is dead in the water. Pelosi needs 70 Republicans so she let the CBC off the hook. Take a look at this article for more examples of grassroots black organizations fighting illegal immigration.

Bill C on May 23, 2007 at 12:21 AM