House Dems to push enforcement-first immigration bill? Update: House GOP introduces Secure Borders First Act

posted at 1:15 pm on June 19, 2007 by Allahpundit

Remember that rumor over the weekend about Reid splitting the amnesty bill into a bunch of different amendments to soak up the time alloted for debate and shut out Jeff Sessions and the anti-amnesty funky bunch? Well, the AP confirmed it last night. Mind you, that’s in tandem with his using Rule 14 to fast-track the bill so that it needn’t suffer the indignity of going through committee first. Soon we’ll be treated to the chicanery of Republican fencesitters voting to give the amnesty wing its 60 votes for cloture and then voting no on the bill itself so that they can tell their constituents with a half-straight face that they were against the bill. The only cheap, anti-democratic maneuver that they haven’t suggested is an agreement that the bill needs less than 50 votes to pass. And rest assured, if not for the constitutional hurdle, they’d be trying that too.

So perhaps it’s time to “re-orient” ourselves away from the Senate and towards the House. Sir Tancelot’s already given us a reason to hope. Now comes word from the WashTimes that man’s best friend, the Blue Dog Democrats, might be ready to chew this one up:

House Democrats say they may break the immigration issue up into a series of smaller bills that would put off the tougher parts and allow others to pass, such as border security, and high-tech and agriculture worker programs that have clear support.

That could buy Democrats more time to work out the tougher aspects of immigration, such as what to do about the estimated 12 million to 20 million illegal aliens now here, but it would go against the Senate’s massive catchall approach and contradicts President Bush’s call for a broad bill to pass.

Music to the House GOP’s ears, but why would the Dems go for it? Answer: Because a bunch of their freshmen come from conservativish districts and could be looking at a rough time next year with the scarlet “A” pinned to their chests.

Clear divisions exist on the House side, where several freshman Democrats, such as Rep. Nancy Boyda of Kansas, a member of the Immigration Reform Caucus, oppose the current Senate plan.

“Congress needs to prove to the American people that it can control the borders, and that comes with addressing border security first and only until that trust can be restored,” said Boyda spokeswoman Shanan Guinn. “Until you take care of that problem, talking about anything else is not going to satisfy rebuilding that trust.”

The National Republican Congressional Committee is targeting dozens of freshman Democrats, such as Mrs. Boyda, who captured seats in conservative districts President Bush won in 2004.

“This is the Democrats’ dilemma: Either [House Speaker Nancy] Pelosi forces their vulnerable members to walk the plank and vote against the interests and values of their districts, or she has another broken promise on her hands,” said NRCC spokesman Ken Spain.

The vote on Tancredo’s measure to deny emergency funding to sanctuary cities went 234-189, with 49 Democrats voting in favor. Pelosi would have to flip 29 of them to get a majority for amnesty while also being careful not to alienate any far-left, open-borders Dems in the course of making concessions to the Republicans. Or, alternatively, Bush could try to swing a few House GOP members her way. But what possible reason at this point could congressional Republicans have for doing Bush’s bidding?

Update: St. John says he’s so, so disappointed in the deterioration of political discourse over this issue. I think we all are.

Update: The battle lines are drawn.

In a sharp rebuke to President Bush, House Republicans today introduced their own immigration reform and border security bill, a tough measure that would bar illegal immigrants from gaining legal status, require employers to check the legal status of all workers and make English the nation’s official language.

The Secure Borders First Act stresses operational control over the border as one of its core principles. The bill would reject “amnesty” and insist that the administration do more to enforce existing laws…

The new bill addresses major issues in immigration but it also turns a microscope on smaller issues that particularly frustrate conservatives. It would ban the use of matricula consular cards, identification cards issued by Mexican consulates and used by immigrants to open bank accounts or buy homes. It would make three convictions for drunk driving grounds for deportation…

Workers would not be able to bring their family and would not be able to gain citizenship, and one-quarter of their wages would be held in escrow to be picked up at the border when they returned home. They could stay for up to 22 months at a time and could participate repeatedly in the program but would have to return home between work periods for a duration of one-fifth the length of their stay in the U.S.

The bill would require the detention and deportation of all gang members. Currently, gang members are not deportable unless they have committed a crime.


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

Like we have been saying for a while now, tighten up the borders, bill #1, penalize the companies employing the slave labor, bill#2 and the 12 million will shrink dramatically.
The lobbying efforts on the part of the employers is a massive hurdle that we as Americans need to fight.Actually paying real wages to actual citizens will ruin their bottom line, but it must be done.

bbz123 on June 19, 2007 at 1:40 PM

Why would GOP Senators even do the President’s bidding? But they have.

I thought this bill was dead, now it’s resurrected. I’m wary in my optimism; personally, I don’t even think agri workers should be in any ‘first’ bill. Enforcement, enforcement, enforcement.

linlithgow on June 19, 2007 at 1:41 PM

Republicans should as a matter of principle vote against cloture if they cannot get assurance from Reid that he will not split the bill up into a bunch of amendments to stifle legitimate amendments. If Reid then breaks his promise, Republicans should all vote against the bill on principle. It would then fail because several Democrats are strongly opposed to the bill as it stands.

If any Republican does other than the above, it shows that he/she is not a true Republican, but, rather, is a 5th column traitor.

ptolemy on June 19, 2007 at 1:41 PM

bbz123-

Better they pay the price than they force the rest of us to pick up the cost.

If you can’t run a business unless you hire illegals, then perhaps your business should fail.

linlithgow on June 19, 2007 at 1:42 PM

I don’t trust them any farther than I can throw them. If this sound good then there’s something seriously wrong with it.

rplat on June 19, 2007 at 1:49 PM

Exactly linlithgow, they want to give a massive subsidy to bad business practice and shore up a voter bloc, one for the GOP and one for the Dems, that is why they are trying to mash this travesty through. Let Tyson Chicen go doen the tubes, I would rather pay more for my foos than forever be taxed to support their business model.

bbz123 on June 19, 2007 at 1:50 PM

The DC crowd just doesn’t seem to get it. Border security and law enforcement first. Until both of these are demonstrated no action on the rest of the problem.

duff65 on June 19, 2007 at 1:55 PM

I think we should still call our Senators, AP.

PRCalDude on June 19, 2007 at 1:56 PM

Would this be a failure on Pelosi’s part then?

Skywise on June 19, 2007 at 1:57 PM

Pelosi would have to flip 29 of them come up with another 1.4 billion in earmarks to get a majority for amnesty.

Fixed it.

For Sale: America
Contact: N. Pelosi at 1-800-BUYVOTE

fogw on June 19, 2007 at 2:01 PM

Sir Tancelot’s

Allah, you are my officially my hero now.

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 2:06 PM

Maybe with some luck the following will happen:

1) The blue dog Dems will do the right, non-partisan thing and save the day for the USA.
2) Pelosi’s shriek will be heard all the way to San Francisco and back again. She’ll go thermonuclear on all dems who vote against her wishes and never let them get another earmark.
3) She will so offend these blue dogs that enough of them will go independent or become RINOs, putting Pelosi out of a speakership.

Ha. It would be nice, though. Heath Shuler and company, bark and bite away. This bone is worth it.

flutejpl on June 19, 2007 at 2:09 PM

And yes, keep the pressure on our corrupt politicians. Don’t get sloppy.

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 2:09 PM

Who let the dogs out? Woof…Woof…Woof…Woof…

Gyro on June 19, 2007 at 2:10 PM

Because a bunch of their freshmen come from conservativish districts and could be looking at a rough time next year with the scarlet “A” pinned to their chests.

Nothing like the fear of not getting reelected to get a Pol to do the right thing. If that’s what it takes……….

Mallard T. Drake on June 19, 2007 at 2:12 PM

Let’s not get all cynical about the Dems on this issue, shall we?

There’s enough wrong with this bill that people in both parties know it needs to die a permanent death. But we don’t want partisanship from us to ignite partisanship from them and let the bill get passed, lost somewhere in the shuffle.

Illegal immigration is a bipartisan issue…let’s keep it that way.

James on June 19, 2007 at 2:19 PM

Border enforcment first.

Deporting illegals guilty of committing crimes while in this country, or who have been deported for being illegal before, second.

Enforcement of laws prohibiting employers form hiring illegals, including jail time if appropriate, third.

Then and ONLY THEN, can we dicuss “regularizing” the 12-20 million illegal aliens in this country.

I personally have no issue with illegal aliens who would like to become American citizens by joining the legal immigration queue by coming forward and identifying themselves, paying their back taxes, learning English and assimilating into our culture, learning our system of government, and who DO NOT HAVE a criminal record earned while in this country.

My father was a naturalized America. My mother’s father was a naturalized American, as was her mother. We are a NATION of immigrants and we ought to be proud of it.

BUT….coming here illegally to “make a buck” does NOT qualify as a valid reason to be allowed to remain here, absent a committment to assimilate and become one of us — to become an American.

We can absorb these 12-20 million people as long as our borders are defended against illegal crossing and more don’t pour in. We can absorb them if THEY decide to personally commit to becoming Americans. That means forswearing allegience to their country of birth, learning English, demonstrating understanding of our Constitution, obeying our laws while in this country, and undertaking true allegience to the United States of America, and willing to defend her against all enemies, domestic and foreign.

Absent all of that, illegal aliens should not be allowed to remain.

georgej on June 19, 2007 at 2:27 PM

James, you are right.

This is certainly a bipartisan issue. So many Americans ARE against this, I don’t understand how anything can happen before enforcement! I don’t even know what to say about it anymore. I almost wish I was one of those people who had no interest or knowledge whatsoever when it came to politics, it’s a heck of a lot less depressing. Is it true…ignorance is bliss??

hollygolightly on June 19, 2007 at 2:31 PM

Wow. We are now counting on Democrats to kill the immigration bill?

The GOP is really in sad shape these days.

Anton on June 19, 2007 at 2:38 PM

The GOP is really in sad shape these days.

Anton on June 19, 2007 at 2:38 PM

Pitiful, isn’t it?

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 2:40 PM

If the blue dog dem’s do come through, I will consider supporting them in the future. The GOP doesn’t seem to appreciate my views, my service or my money anymore, anyway, so why not?

JustTruth101 on June 19, 2007 at 2:41 PM

The RNC, short on money and support, are resorting to all kinds of plots (what Harry Reid said, the president’s birthday coming up, etc.) to reach our soft spot. Thus, yesterday came an e-mail from no other than Laura Bush “help sign an e-card to celebrate the president’s 60th birthday”, or similar.

I started “Happy birthday Mr. President” – then, you don’t want to know what followed. Hammer them on every occasion you can, regardless of the shenanigans used in the Senate.

It’s a perfect storm and a great time to expose them all naked, lefties and righties. They’re all for sale, and they’re all replaceable.

p.s. who cares how J. McCain feels any more?

Entelechy on June 19, 2007 at 2:52 PM

They have lied, cheated and stolen to get this passed and the American public doesn’t want it. They can’t even buy it thru. IT’s A LOSER.

WAKE UP DC, listen to the people- 60% to 70% hate this bill.
Thats a landslide.

SAVE all the time and money, enforce the existing laws NOW. And build all the fences promised, budgeted and already written into the law.

I think the worst fact I’ve read these past few weeks is that these ‘undocumented americans‘ ILLEGAL ALIENS cost each tax paying real American citizen, on average $19,000.000 per year, per illegal, EVERY YEAR!!!!! This includes all of them that work doing ‘those jobs… ladidadida…

WE DON’T NEED THEM.

shooter on June 19, 2007 at 2:54 PM

Heath Shuler and company, bark and bite away.
flutejpl on June 19, 2007 at 2:09 PM

Heath’s my boy! Hopefully he’s part of the new Democratic party reformation.
One can hope.

SouthernDem on June 19, 2007 at 2:57 PM

Dem, I hope you guys can reign in the crackpots running your party right now, for everyone’s sake.

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 3:02 PM

Don’t trust, and make sure you verify that sh*t.

omnipotent on June 19, 2007 at 3:20 PM

I love the fact that House members are up for re-election every two years. They know they can’t get away with pulling crap like this.

I may be overly optimistic, but I think Nancy is going to have a hard time twisting arms to get the blue dogs on her side if they feel it will hurt their re-election chances. They already kneecapped Nancy on the Hoyer-for-Murtha vote and they know they can get away with it. They don’t fear her, and from the Tanc amendment last week it appears they do fear the voters in their respective districts.

I’ve also heard there are a few members of the Congressional Black Caucus that are feeling heat from their constituents over amnesty since the illegal immigrants have undercut the constituent’s wages and employment opportunities.

thirteen28 on June 19, 2007 at 3:22 PM

Enforcement now!

While sitting in on a panel for hospitality and culinary arts college students in Maryland recently, I was stunned to hear the panel chair, the owner of a well-respected and (presumed) successful area restaurant, unabashedly inform the audience, which consisted of majority culinary arts students, that he couldn’t afford to hire them into his kitchen and that in fact, Spanish was the only language spoken in his kitchen. Brazenly, he explained his ‘dilemma’ to the audience thusly, “Under-paying illegals is the only way I can keep my restaurant in the black.” He implied that he was only operating as he had to in order to remain competitive within the market.

Illegal immigration is having a debilitating effect on American lives. If you can’t beat ‘em join ‘em is the clear lesson (business model) businessmen have learned and adopted…often at the expense of their own neighbors and our next generation.

Where’s the fence!?

BJ Phisch on June 19, 2007 at 3:26 PM

SouthernDem on June 19, 2007 at 2:57 PM

I thought that site stopshuler was pretty entertaining, you ever see that?

Spirit of 1776 on June 19, 2007 at 3:56 PM

Watch the House Republican job approval ratings go through the roof.

If only the tutu wearing Senate Repubs will get a clue.

Speakup on June 19, 2007 at 3:57 PM

1) Enforce and fortify the borders

2) Strictly enact current laws regarding immigration.

3) Tell Americans it’s OK not to want illegals in their country and start reporting suspects to the local authorities (as in #2).

Hening on June 19, 2007 at 4:02 PM

I won’t believe it until they fund ALL of the enforcement provisions and contracts for fence building, visa-tracking, b background investigating, et., are signed.

And I don’t mean a puny 4.4, either.

RushBaby on June 19, 2007 at 4:06 PM

o pimf

RushBaby on June 19, 2007 at 4:06 PM

Hey, maybe our guys are finally getting the idea. Hopefully the House will set themselves on enforcement first, and the Senate will have to cave or scrap the whole effort.

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 4:07 PM

The House has always represented the will of the people better than the Senate whose members prize getting along with their fellow Senators more than representing the people.

What we need is a border enforcement only bill that builds a fence.

Workers would not be able to bring their family and would not be able to gain citizenship, and one-quarter of their wages would be held in escrow to be picked up at the border when they returned home. They could stay for up to 22 months at a time and could participate repeatedly in the program but would have to return home between work periods for a duration of one-fifth the length of their stay in the U.S.

That sounds like a great idea. It works extremely well in Japan. The guest workers that do the jobs “no Japanese will do” have no chance of citizenship and are not allowed to bring their families.

januarius on June 19, 2007 at 4:17 PM

Way to go, House GOP.

thirteen28 on June 19, 2007 at 4:20 PM

I’m doing a word-find on the article about the House GOP bill and the word “fence” isn’t showing up.

I mean, yeah, way to go, but come on.

see-dubya on June 19, 2007 at 4:26 PM

How many of these so called “Blue Dog Democrats” are in reality first term congress critters and therefore just haven’t learned the rules and therefore begun to enjoy the perks of “representing” their district? I am willing to bet with enough arm twisting from their senior citizen members they will be in bed with the rest of the established Democrat party members who have Huffington on speed dial for talking points.
I will never trust a Dem any further then I can throw them, and if you look at some of the fat cats on their side of the aisle you will realize that ain’t very far.

LakeRuins on June 19, 2007 at 4:28 PM

Spirit of 1776 on June 19, 2007 at 3:56 PM

LOL, that’s hilarious, thanks!

SouthernDem on June 19, 2007 at 4:29 PM

Now, just add something about a real, useful fence so we can all relax for just five minutes and think we might actually have congresspeople with brains after all.

hollygolightly on June 19, 2007 at 4:38 PM

SouthernDem on June 19, 2007 at 4:29 PM

Pleasure:)

“The federal government has lost credibility with the American people on immigration,” said Rep. Elton Gallegly (R-Simi Valley), who contributed sections of the bill…

“We want to stop the Senate amnesty bill in its tracks right now,” King said.

That’s the kind of straight talk I like right there! Nice to see the House GOP take an active role in this debate.

Spirit of 1776 on June 19, 2007 at 4:39 PM

I want to see a wall built across both borders.

I want to see anyone here illegally who has committed a crime deported (including DUIs).

I want everyone to know that they have 6 months to get out or else when caught (at a hospital, traffic stop, or anywhere else), they will be deported and not allowed to return.

Make crossing the border by an illegal a felony.

After 6 months, their property can be confiscated if they are caught here illegally.

Anchor babies can not allow you to come here faster, nor stay here. Those kids can return at the age of 18.

Ban them from welfare, SSI or any other public benefit.

Finally, only allow educated people back in (and those who are married to US citizens).

No need for major deportation, witchhunts, or massive immigration raids.

Tim Burton on June 19, 2007 at 4:48 PM

Just curious if there has been a shift in the number of hits to the topics covered here and also in HA “Headlines”? In other words have the hits to topics like this one on immigration dropped because the story is covered in the headlines which many readers may read first and decide not to click on the posted story (when pressed for time, etc.)? Just wondering why the number is so low.

NightmareOnKStreet on June 19, 2007 at 4:48 PM

You shouldn’t give anyone anytime to prepare to leave.

A military border is the only way.

tomas on June 19, 2007 at 5:06 PM

See? Now that’s more like it. Congressmen falling all over themselves to offer “enforcement first” bills.

The People have spoken.

CliffHanger on June 19, 2007 at 5:07 PM

I’m lovin’ the House right now.

Keep it up, Folks!!

tickleddragon on June 19, 2007 at 5:09 PM

The Secure Borders First Act from the House Republicans sounds almost sexually arousing to me. Is that bad?

Zetterson on June 19, 2007 at 5:11 PM

Good Point See-Dub. Did you try “WALL”? Just a thought.

I guess we better see what these guys are proposing first, eh?

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 5:11 PM

I’m doing a word-find on the article about the House GOP bill and the word “fence” isn’t showing up.

I mean, yeah, way to go, but come on.

see-dubya on June 19, 2007 at 4:26 PM

Yeah, lets keep a close eye on this one. I’m looking forward to learning more about the details. It sounds much more promising though. We’ll see…

Zetterson on June 19, 2007 at 5:15 PM

Another telling word-find would be “subject to the availability of funds”.

RushBaby on June 19, 2007 at 5:27 PM

AP
Even though the Elisabeth post caught my eye. After reading your frustration of lack of comments on this immigration post I felt I really should comment here first.
so here it goes
Ditto to most of the comments above.
No
In all honesty, I do hope the WashTimes is right about the blue dogs, also I did just watch Cavuto. He had on Peter King and another Rep., I didn’t catch his name, they were talking tough on enforcement of existing laws first then in a few years dealing with the 12 to 20+ million. No credit was given to our brave knight “Sir Tancelot”, lets just hope he has opened some eyes. Cavuto also had on Steve Elliott, President of Grassfire.org who e-mails me constantly. I thank him for his effort. It’s almost scary to say that it feels as if the pendulum has swung back in favor of law and order but I just don’t trust these guys as far as I can throw Rosie. …….Damn I tried not to mention that other post again.

abinitioadinfinitum on June 19, 2007 at 5:32 PM

Since I don’t want Pablo to have to carry a boulder and throw it at Border Agents and do them bodily harm, because of the lure of agricultural jobs here, I think farmers should be going to their local city/county/state jail/prison system and get their labor there.

That way, Pablo can stay home and be a good citizen of Mexico. See Geraldo, I do have a heart.

moonsbreath on June 19, 2007 at 5:40 PM

The Secure Borders First Act from the House Republicans sounds almost sexually arousing to me. Is that bad?

Zetterson on June 19, 2007 at 5:11 PM

LOL… no, it just means that you are SO STARVED for SO LONG that anthing making sense out of DC causes euphoria.

ricer1 on June 19, 2007 at 5:44 PM

Nothing like the fear of not getting reelected to get a Pol to do the right thing. If that’s what it takes……….

Mallard T. Drake on June 19, 2007 at 2:12 PM

That’s what it is ALWAYS supposed to take. That’s why citizens MUST be engaged in the political process, to keep their elected representatives aware that betrayal has consequences. That’s what has not happened in over 40 years, and if our immigration problem is what brings it back, then history may count it a blessing in disguise.

And yes, keep the pressure on our corrupt politicians. Don’t get sloppy.

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 2:09 PM

Or you could say it like that. ;-)

Freelancer on June 19, 2007 at 5:58 PM

Elton Gallegly is our representative. We may have two worthless senators but at least our congressman is a good guy.

Rose on June 19, 2007 at 6:04 PM

Yeah, but even if this got past Speaker Stretch, wouldn’t the conference with the Senate Shamnesty kill it, and put in all the stuff we don’t want and take out all the sexy stuff we do?

Iblis on June 19, 2007 at 6:05 PM

I do like the sound of the House bill.

Stormy70 on June 19, 2007 at 6:08 PM

I wonder if it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to shorten Senate terms by half to keep ALL of our fair members of Congress in good standing with the will of the people.

Speakup on June 19, 2007 at 6:15 PM

Se vende Ameria! (America for sale)

…and what’s been preventing you guys from doing this 5 years ago?

Mojave Mark on June 19, 2007 at 6:20 PM

Yeah, but even if this got past Speaker Stretch, wouldn’t the conference with the Senate Shamnesty kill it, and put in all the stuff we don’t want and take out all the sexy stuff we do?

Iblis on June 19, 2007 at 6:05 PM

If they do that though, it won’t survive the subsequent vote in the house. And if the bills are too far apart when they go to conference, it might not even make it out (that’s what happened last year when the senate’s amnesty bill could not be reconciled with the house enforcement bill).

thirteen28 on June 19, 2007 at 6:42 PM

It is easier now to take advantage of your president

tomas on June 19, 2007 at 6:51 PM

Tony Snow, on the radio today, said that the bills and laws already passed can;t be enforced.

Why?

Well, because… you know… er… it’s… complicated…

Worst tapdancing on record since Trent Lott’s mea culpa on BET explaining his retroactive vote for the Dixiecrats at Strom’s 100th birthday party.

BUILD THE DAMNED WALL!
ENFORCED THE DAMNED LAWS!
FIRE THE DAMNED POLITICAL PIMPS!

profitsbeard on June 19, 2007 at 6:53 PM

Seems too good to be true to me. I smell a rat. Sorry for being so jaded and cynical, but who can blame me?

SouthernGent on June 19, 2007 at 6:55 PM

Worst tapdancing on record

profitsbeard on June 19, 2007 at 6:53 PM

Absolutely. I heard Tony Snow an hour ago on Hannity’s show. I was very surprised to hear Sean hammer him over and over. He wouldn’t let up—it was great.

IrishEi on June 19, 2007 at 6:57 PM

re: the update –
that sounds like a pretty good bill that the republican house is introducing. It doesn’t have a chance in hell… too bad, really. I like the “gang deportation” thing and getting rid of the consular card.

pullingmyhairout on June 19, 2007 at 7:31 PM

Michelle has the press release up from the House Immigration Reform Caucus.

Go read it.

It’ll make your day! :-)

INC on June 19, 2007 at 8:29 PM

It looks like the House members actually understand what so many of us are saying and exactly why we don’t trust our government to enforce new laws when they refuse to enforce the old laws. I know I’ll feel a whole lot better about discussing what to do with the criminal aliens already here once the border is secure and measures for interior enforcement are up and working. It makes good sense to me so it doesn’t have a snowballs chance does it?

Buzzy on June 19, 2007 at 9:07 PM

Michelle has a link to MKHam also, where Jessica Alba makes sense, along with Ahnold and Pacino.

But this makes NO sense:
“Jessica Alba who plays Invisible Woman in “Fantastic Four: Rise of The Silver Surfer,”…”

What is this world coming to?

shooter on June 19, 2007 at 10:36 PM

It is easier now to take advantage of your president

tomas on June 19, 2007 at 6:51 PM

Who screwed who first here? He wants to screw us? Screw him!

Bad Candy on June 19, 2007 at 10:56 PM

Newt’s action item on the McCain-Kennedy ‘compromise’.

Entelechy on June 20, 2007 at 12:01 AM

All these people are switching sides now? WTF?

WisCon on June 20, 2007 at 12:28 AM

Let Tyson Chicen go doen the tubes, I would rather pay more for my foos than forever be taxed to support their business model.

bbz123 on June 19, 2007 at 1:50 PM

I’ll raise my own d@mn chicken, Thank you!

I could care less if Tyson, the pork processers or others went belly-up, it would save me from paying for their employees in the long run.

91Veteran on June 20, 2007 at 12:32 AM

The good news is that we have their ear. At any other time in history , this bill would have long been passed. They are watching and reading…and we are relentless. Eventually there has to be a vote, and they are afraid of the recoil. The mainstream, who want secure borders, out number and way out vote the other side. This is the issue that pushes the undecided to decided…and the left knows it.

right2bright on June 20, 2007 at 8:08 AM

Who screwed who first here? He wants to screw us? Screw him!

Why should he deal with backstabbers.

tomas on June 20, 2007 at 9:56 AM

Awesome.

Jaibones on June 20, 2007 at 3:39 PM

As part of any enforcement bill, why not include some stiff monetary punishment for “sanctuary” cities. Yes, you can refuse to follow US law, your liberal twits, but for once you’re going to have to pay a price for it….. no federal school aid, no money for roads or bridges, removal of any US government facilities, etc.

Can I get an “amen” on that?

Mustafa Hemmroid on June 21, 2007 at 2:13 PM