Countdown to amnesty; Update: Bush calls bill “amnesty” (sort of); Update: Heart-ache, 64-35; Update: 15 16 Republicans switched from no to yes

posted at 10:16 am on June 26, 2007 by Allahpundit

The cloture vote’s scheduled for 11:50. Updates will appear here throughout the day. Bush’s people are optimistic — with good reason, says the boss, who has her ear to the ground. Go have a look at NRO’s editorial about the seven senators who could kill the bill outright today: six Republicans plus Jim Webb, who campaigned on an anti-amnesty platform last year. The WashTimes did its own count and sees hope fading:

Opponents of the bill counted about 32 senators prepared to block the bill and another dozen senators they said would swing today’s vote. But The Times found four of those swing votes said they will vote to revive the bill today: Republican Sens. Christopher S. Bond of Missouri and Thad Cochran of Mississippi, and Democratic Sens. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico and Ben Nelson of Nebraska. Press reports showed others have also said they are likely to vote to revive the bill, including Sen. Richard M. Burr, North Carolina Republican.

Bond’s “yes” vote is the dumbest of all since he’s planning to vote no on the second cloture vote if his amendment — which calls for gutting the whole bill by stripping out the amnesty provision — doesn’t pass. Which it never, ever will. But to throw him and the rest of the anti-amnesty crew a bone, the three amigos have added an extra moronic, meaningless, purely symbolic if not actually self-defeating “touchback” requirement to the bill:

With a crucial test vote scheduled for today, Republican supporters of a sweeping immigration bill threw their weight yesterday behind a significant change to the legislation that would force illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for legal status…

Kyl, Graham and Martinez had already put together an amendment to secure $4.4 billion for border enforcement, create a tracking system to keep tabs on guest workers and permanently bar workers who overstay their visas from returning. Those measures would augment provisions already in the bill to tighten border security and clamp down on employers of illegal immigrants.

Yesterday, the three senators added a provision that would force illegal immigrants to return to their home countries to apply for Z Visas, not just their green cards. With the architects of the bill behind it, supporters predicted that the amendment would pass easily…

Indeed, it was the Department of Homeland Security that wanted legalization not to be contingent on leaving the country, because DHS officials wanted to bring illegal immigrants out of the shadows and into the legal system, Specter said. With the “touchback” requirement, millions may stay underground.

Everyone understand what’s going on here? They’re so eager to pass this piece of shinola, they’re adding provisions that will make it less likely that the bill will actually work just to get the votes needed to pass it. They’re trading practical viability for legislative viability. And it gets worse:

Two thousand more border agents are to be “hired, trained, and reporting for duty,” bringing the number of agents to 20,000; an additional 100 miles of vehicle barriers were just added, bringing that number to 300 miles; and 105 ground-based radar and camera towers are to be built, up from 70 just two weeks ago.

However, one Republican leadership aide told FOX News that the $4.4 billion is not nearly enough money to cover these substantial increases, warning against any guarantee that the provisions will be paid for down the road. “There’s no way that’s enough. So they’ll have to appropriate more, and there’s a big difference between authorizing and appropriating.”

Not nearly enough. Just like with the virtual fence they’re playing with right now in Arizona.

Jim DeMint’s talking tough by threatening to cut off limbs, but I think he knows who’s got the saw here and it ain’t him. Stand by for updates. I make no promises, but if the rabbit is pulled out of the hat and this crap dies today, we may just see a euphoric, celebratory cameo from Humping Robot to herald the victory. In the meantime:


Update: Freudian slip or the usual Bushian malaprop?

ABC News’ Rick Klein reports: President Bush has spent a whole lot of time in recent months claiming that the immigration bill isn’t “amnesty.”

But in describing the measure Tuesday morning, an apparent slip of the tongue suggested otherwise — providing fodder for the talk-radio crowd that loathes the bill and wants it defeated in the Senate.

“You know, I’ve heard all the rhetoric — you’ve heard it, too — about how this is amnesty. Amnesty means that you’ve got to pay a price for having been here illegally, and this bill does that,” Bush said, according to the official White House transcript.

Update: A superb post at the Corner by Stanley Kurtz says what I suspect a lot of people — and by “a lot,” I mean millions — are thinking right now.

Somehow this immigration battle feels different. The bill is wildly unpopular, yet it’s close to passing. The contrast with the high-school textbook version of democracy is not only glaring and maddening, it’s downright embarrassing. Usually, even when we’re at each others’ throats, there’s still an underlying pride in the democratic process. This immigration battle strips us of even that pride.

I’m still stuck on the way this bill was going to be pushed through without a public airing of crucial provisions, in the two or three days before Memorial Day recess. But I should be stuck even further back–on the way this bill was cooked up in a backroom deal that bypassed the ordinary process of public hearings. We take them for granted, but those civics textbook fundamentals are there for a reason. We’re going to pay a steep price for setting the fundamentals aside…

Supporters of this bill sell it as a compromise that will heal America’s divisions. I fear it’s quite the reverse. This bill is infuriating the public and undermining faith in government itself. You can see it in the polling on confidence in Congress and the President. If this bill passes, it’s going to aggravate and embitter politics for years to come. Passing a measure over such overwhelming opposition is like slapping the public in the face.

Update: Norm Coleman, facing the onslaught of Frankenmania in next year’s senate election, will vote yes on cloture.

Update: The vote’s coming now. I’m going to liveblog it.

They’re calling the roll now, which, I presume, is just to see if everyone’s present. They’re not announcing how each one voted after reading his/her name so I guess the vote is right after this.

Wait, no — it looks like this is the actual vote. They’re not even announcing the votes as they come in. We’re going to have to wait until all the votes are in.

I count only 29 no’s thus far and most everyone’s voted. Jim Webb just voted yes. We’re going to lose.

Ensign just voted yes.

Update: It wasn’t even close. 64-35. There shall be no Humping Robot today, my friends — nor, perhaps, ever again.

Stand by for the roll.

Update: Like Lowry says, this gives shamnesty a cushion for the do-or-die second cloture vote on Thursday. Even if Sessions and DeMint can peel off a few supporters, the McCainiacs still have 60 to put it through.

Update: Here’s the roll of shame. The cloture vote on June 7th went 45-50; Debbie Stabenow, a Democrat from Michigan, actually switched from yes on that vote to no today. Which means the amnesty wing picked up a cool 20 yeses in the interim: Bennett, Bingaman, Bond, Boxer, Brownback, Burr, Coleman, Collins, Domenici, Ensign, Gregg, Kyl, Lott, McConnell, Murkowski, Pryor, Snowe, Stevens, Warner, Webb.

The boldface indicates Republicans, my friends. Sixteen of them — 15 no/yes switches plus Brownback, who didn’t vote on June 7th. Update: My mistake — I missed that Evan Bayh, like Stabenow, also switched from yes to no. And that Larry Craig switched from no to yes. That makes 17 Republicans who switched.

shame.png

Update: As mentioned above, the House GOP is planning a resolution this afternoon expressing its displeasure with the bill. According to Boehner, the White House isn’t happy about it.


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

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

I apologize Slublog…just ignore me, Im just pretty pissed today. No offense
DwnSouthJukin on June 26, 2007 at 2:23 PM

No offense taken at all. This is a pretty down day.

Slublog on June 26, 2007 at 2:25 PM

I apologize Slublog…just ignore me, Im just pretty pissed today. No offense

DwnSouthJukin on June 26, 2007 at 2:23 PM

We all are

aclark on June 26, 2007 at 2:26 PM

I’ll take “Republicans Whose Time In Public Service Just Came To A Screeching Halt,” for 10-12 Million please, Alex…

Welcome, HarryBalzac; classic post.

Jaibones on June 26, 2007 at 2:26 PM

Well, my state Georgia state Senators voted against cloture. Who do I rail against?

Queasy on June 26, 2007 at 2:23 PM

Keep up the pressure, according to Rush and other sources there is another cloture on Thursday to actually bring it to a vote! Also start contacting your representative, let him/her know where you stand!

SSG Fuzzy on June 26, 2007 at 2:27 PM

follow the money.. the voters little piddly contributions mean nothing…big business wins the day.

Twoconservative on June 26, 2007 at 1:24 PM

More to the point, politicians vote the way their big contributors want, then pay lip service to the constituency. They still need the smaller donations for their campaigns. Print out this list and keep it. Contact the RNC and tell them you won’t contribute a dime if they give money to any of the R’s who voted for cloture. Support the Senators who voted against cloture. Keep making your opinions known, now, next week, every week from now until the election.

Snidely Whiplash on June 26, 2007 at 2:27 PM

I would like to have been privy to the tactics used in coerceing the yes votes out of the flip floppers. This thing was beat once. Did Reid set a precident in the rules? The Supreme Court might have something to say about the wholesale visa ammendment. This is being done to set up a fomidible voting block for the Democrats and a debt relief for the Republicans. We the people are being liquidated. The White House probably told the dissenters the truth. The nation is now owned by China and this is what they want. Is it ok to take advantage of the situation and use this as an oppurtunity to rise on the socio economic ladder? I have a few ideas.

sonnyspats1 on June 26, 2007 at 2:29 PM

Well, my state Georgia state Senators voted against cloture. Who do I rail against?

Queasy on June 26, 2007 at 2:23 PM

El Presidente de los Estados Unidos, Jorge Arbusto

aclark on June 26, 2007 at 2:29 PM

Chaotic Ramblings on June 26, 2007 at 2:10 PM

FYI, both Levin and Stabenow are Dems. For some reason, Stabenow switched to “no” today, which is a rare bright spot from one of the darkest corners of that ignominious chamber. Levin, on the other hand, continues in his role as Prince of Darkness. Nothing unexpected there.

marc@hubsandspokes on June 26, 2007 at 2:33 PM

Pilgrim if you start a rebellion I wanna come.

Its not even the bill that makes me so mad, its the fact that our government is so blatantly going against the will of the majority of the American people. Its unconstitutional, its undemocratic, its UN-AMERICAN.

I don’t know who to pressure now – both my TX senators voted no. I’ll send them a note of thanks, but what to do now?

Keli on June 26, 2007 at 2:36 PM

If this gets through the House, I’ll start looking into LEGALLY immigrating to Canada.

Paul the American on June 26, 2007 at 12:38 PM

Not me, I’m gonna get a real good tan, forget english, escape to Mexico and sneak across the border back into Texas so me and my family can reap some of these benefits I’m already paying for.

silenced majority on June 26, 2007 at 2:38 PM

I am almost glad that our Senators so blatantly ignored the wishes of the American people. It will open up more eyes and stimulate anger and action. It’s time more people realize that NOTHING IS THE SAME ANYMORE and everyone must fight for the survival of our way of life.

We can’t continue to blithely ignore what our the government is up to while we go about our day focused on getting ahead and making our lives more enjoyable. The cruise ship is sinking while the passengers are stuffing their faces at the buffet. All systems have been breaking down for years, but not many have paid any attention beyond a shake of the head and a frown, “Someone has to do something about that.”

Although I’ve always voted, I was as guilty as the rest until Clinton’s reign of infamy began and the rule of law became the rule of whatever-you-can-get-away-with. Now I have educated myself through the internet. (TV news and newspapers are a complete waste of time, even FOX News is a joke – they give minute to minute coverage of car chases, courtroom antics, missing women, and the love lives of British princes but not of something that affects the whole nation like this vote). I sign petitions, write to elected officials, inform friends and family. And now, after the primaries (to support Fred Thompson), I will remove my name from Republican Party affiliation and become an Independent.

I hope this shakes up a lot of people so that, together, we can take back our country from the ruling elite. No taxation without representation. No standing on the sidelines while somebody else takes care of things. We cannot ignore our right and obligation to get involved, let our voice be heard, inform and activate other people, and vote!

blue sky on June 26, 2007 at 2:43 PM

Well, I live in The (Elitists) Republik of Massachusettstan, so I got Lurch and The Fatman himself, neither of which have ever been swayed from doing anything other than backstabbing America.

BKennedy on June 26, 2007 at 2:50 PM

The American people have become so apathetic about our federal government over the years, (and our mainstream media has been complicit or even responsible for that apathy), that the necessary discussion about how we lost our government will probably never get started among the people.

We can discuss it in the blogosphere and talk-radio, but the more ardent our voices become, the more we will be painted as an extremist fringe element. Most Americans don’t understand, (I don’t think), that the discussion here is what “responsible citizens” have always partaken of and is an essential part of a functioning democracy. If we were normal people we would all be discussing Paris Hilton and the last episode of the Sopranos right about now. Certainly we wouldn’t be discussing national sovereignty and the rule of law. On another topic, we wouldn’t be discussing Islam and terrorism either, because that would mean the terrorists won; no, we would go shopping to prove that we still have the American spirit.

I think the Senate, in spite of the fact that nearly everyone is apposed to this bill, feels they can get away with this because most people will fall back to their default apathetic position and continue about their daily lives. They may be right.

I only hope that the Senators are wrong and that the American people band together to renew our broken democracy. Obviously, the Senate has not earned a right to be a part of that process. The problem is that, unless the Senate screwed up, (from their perspective), and the degree of change in this country accelerates to a point where enough American’s take notice, people are likely to gradually adjust to the change and continue to feel that there is little they can do to affect change.

We may be nearing a time when patriots should consider dusting off their Indian costumes and dumping the tea into the harbor, metaphorically speaking.

FloatingRock on June 26, 2007 at 2:50 PM

blue sky on June 26, 2007 at 2:43 PM

Please repost this on the FIGHT thread

RushBaby on June 26, 2007 at 2:53 PM

Swinehound on June 26, 2007 at 1:52 PM

I worked as an offical for the supervisor of Elections in Broward County Fl, in 11/04 and celebrated the Bush victory at the Airport Sheraton at the Ft.Laud airport. Mel was there at the podium with a full on Mariachi Band I should have got the hint huh ya think?

sonnyspats1 on June 26, 2007 at 2:55 PM

Ensign, what a tool. Reid already knows what I think of him and it ain’t complimentary.

TwinkietheKid on June 26, 2007 at 3:15 PM

Hey Bush (and all running for Pres)…we won’t make the same mistake again.

You have just cemented your legacy with the conservative base. He just doesn’t get it, he really does not hear middle America calling for a secure border. That’s all we want, just what the constitution demands, a secure border. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

right2bright on June 26, 2007 at 3:17 PM

Used to have Lamar Smith, who was gold. Now I have Lloyd Doggett, an entrenched Democrat. Oh, well, I wrote in good faith.

RushBaby on June 26, 2007 at 2:23 PM

Oh, that explains your displeasure with your Representative in the House. I’d be unhappy, too. Mine is John Carter(R). I don’t track all his votes, but on the ones I care about I spot-check and he’s always voted the way I wanted him to. Good ol’ conservative ‘burbs!

aero on June 26, 2007 at 3:25 PM

I heard there is a section in the bill to create a special counsel to look into the mistreatment of Nazis and Fascists living in America during WWII. They want to investigate how they were treated and decide if they should be paid restitution. Wonderful, huh?

Link to that story here:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjZhM2YzNDljZjM4MTIyZDFkZmZmMTNlNmExMjY0NjE=

FYI, both Levin and Stabenow are Dems. For some reason, Stabenow switched to “no” today, which is a rare bright spot from one of the darkest corners of that ignominious chamber. Levin, on the other hand, continues in his role as Prince of Darkness. Nothing unexpected there.

marc@hubsandspokes on June 26, 2007 at 2:33 PM

Thanks for setting me straight. I don’t know how I missed that.

The American people have become so apathetic about our federal government over the years, (and our mainstream media has been complicit or even responsible for that apathy), that the necessary discussion about how we lost our government will probably never get started among the people.
FloatingRock on June 26, 2007 at 2:50 PM

So very true. Well said!

I am almost glad that our Senators so blatantly ignored the wishes of the American people. It will open up more eyes and stimulate anger and action. It’s time more people realize that NOTHING IS THE SAME ANYMORE and everyone must fight for the survival of our way of life.
blue sky on June 26, 2007 at 2:43 PM

Again, I agree. Well said.

We, The People, have to Wake Up and take our country back. It’s Now or Never, literally.

Chaotic Ramblings on June 26, 2007 at 3:26 PM

FloatingRock, well said. I fear most people don’t really care. It is already too late. This bill marks the day we gave our country away, we will never get a tougher bill now. This was the fight at the OK corral, and we lost. We can vote out those responsible, but the damage is done. Can’t unring a bell.

bmac on June 26, 2007 at 3:31 PM

I see this now going 1 of 2 ways.

1 (the hopeful version) the House Republicans manage to stop this bill

2. They figure “eh, well our approval rating numbers are so far down the drain anyways, lets go for broke. ” and pass it.

Razgriez on June 26, 2007 at 3:32 PM

You have just cemented your legacy with the conservative base. He just doesn’t get it, he really does not hear middle America calling for a secure border. That’s all we want, just what the constitution demands, a secure border. Why is that so difficult to comprehend?

right2bright on June 26, 2007 at 3:17 PM

Funny, I used to like that about Bush–he didn’t sway with the ever-changing political winds generated by polls like Clinton did on an almost daily basis. I always felt like Bush had firm core beliefs and I admired the fact that he didn’t compromise those core beliefs so that people would like him more. But on this particular issue, his core belief goes so strongly against the will of the people that it goes far beyond steadfastness to tone-deaf stubbornness.

aero on June 26, 2007 at 3:34 PM

Bush insisted Congress not miss this “historic opportunity.”

An opportunity for what? 12 million legal minimum wagers?

Vincenzo on June 26, 2007 at 1:20 PM

No, for the Dems and RINOs to produce a bill that he has been waiting to sign willingly, in spite of the clear opposition of the vast majority of the American public.

Freelancer on June 26, 2007 at 3:49 PM

It is literally maddening now to me to look at the masses of people, especially among my own age group, that just absolutely do not care. People are being sold out and they couldn’t care less. But this has already been said.

amnistitio delenda est

apostle26 on June 26, 2007 at 3:53 PM

Today the United States Senate sent the world a two-part message.

1. “The U.S. Constitution, which we are sworn to uphold, doesn’t bind us as it thinks it does. We will act outside of it’s boundaries as we wish.”

2. “The people of the United States serve at our pleasure, not the other way around. Thanks in part to McCain/Feingold, incumbent entrenchment is greater than ever, so we have little reason to fear the threats of being voted out. We are the masters, they the servants.”

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

Freelancer on June 26, 2007 at 4:03 PM

After reading thru this thread I had to have a good chuckle……..I have never seen so many commenters up in arms and willing to fight back. The RNC is about to reap what it sowed. Bring on 08, we are more then prepared for it. We might not get the WH, but many will no longer stand in the ‘chamber’ and flip their fingers at us either. Good.

Limerick on June 26, 2007 at 4:14 PM

I’m sorry but what part of the “Legal United States Citizens don’t want this damn bill” isn’t clear?

stanfil2 on June 26, 2007 at 4:17 PM

The only good thing that has come out of the whole opposition to this bill is that I have taken a step back and seen the true voice of the American people, so vibrant and full and alive, right here in the blogosphere. People are switching off their televisions in the thousands to come to sites like this (Michelle, you rock!) and participate. Even if it just a comment in a box along with 450 other comments, it still counts. It COUNTS, because this is America.

cardindex7 on June 26, 2007 at 4:28 PM

The bill won’t pass in the senate version

also, Most of america wants us out of Iraq…should we leave?

tomas on June 26, 2007 at 4:33 PM

Nice try tomas but we are focused……play your thread jack someplace else today. This thread is about cloture, not Iraq.

Limerick on June 26, 2007 at 5:09 PM

The RNC has my last contribution! As for little Norm Coleman, I will do whatever I can to make certain that he is defeated during the next election. So Al Franken get’s elected…and I’m suppose to be upset about that exactly why?

sabbott on June 26, 2007 at 5:27 PM

You don’t have to resign yourself to Frankenfurter…..just get on the bandwagon for a Rep to replace Colemanyellowtail.

Limerick on June 26, 2007 at 5:29 PM

My wife and me as well as 12 other family members went down to our courthouse and switched from republican to independent. We all went in as a group you should have seen the looks on the clerks face. We live in a small town of 10,000 people. Our senator Allard voted against cloture. He’s a good senator.

build the wall on June 26, 2007 at 6:40 PM

Representational democracy works on the honor system. It works on trust. You, the citizen, relinquish your right to decide the fate of your nation, to an elected representative, on the promise that he or she will act according to the will of you and your peers. This gentlemen’s agreement is made in lieu of you and your peers making the fortnight journey to the capital on horseback to vote for yourself.

So it is within this agreement of convenience that democracy, or some close version of it, is purportedly maintained without the actual participation of the people. Some may say this is not democracy. Certainly not how the Greeks envisioned it. But for large nations, and not tiny city states, it was considered the only workable solution, a clever facsimile of democracy. At worst, a clever illusion.

However, if that trust is betrayed, or in any way misused, then you don’t even have the illusion of a democracy. It was a ruse. You have an oligarchy. One could argue that in the wake of the collective epiphany the citizens have now experienced, that the United States is essentially a de facto oligarchy, where an elite cadre of men and women rule, sometimes in accordance with the general will of the people, or sometimes in contempt of it. Either way, it is not the people exercising democracy, it is only a small group of elitists that have that privilege and when they do exercise it, they do so for their own purposes, not for their constituents.

jihadwatcher on June 26, 2007 at 10:34 PM

Wow Landrieu does have some integrity afterall. With this list I now know who not to send money to at election time.

Kermit on June 26, 2007 at 10:36 PM

I keep hearing that “Big Business” is pro-amnesty bill. Tell why then do so many chemical companies and refineries require that all employees are able to read and speak English fluently, at least in this part of Louisiana. It is a safety “reason.” Now then why would they want illegals to be inside the boundary.

I realize that there are other big businesses besides refining and petrochemical but we do need to say more than “Big Business” to be accurate.

Kermit on June 26, 2007 at 10:41 PM

Saying the repubs are better than the dems now reminds me of a joke.

Dr. tells a patient that he has Alzheimer’s AND cancer. The patient responds, “Thank God I don’t have cancer!”

Talon on June 26, 2007 at 10:53 PM

I keep hearing that “Big Business” is pro-amnesty bill. Tell why then do so many chemical companies and refineries require that all employees are able to read and speak English fluently, at least in this part of Louisiana. It is a safety “reason.” Now then why would they want illegals to be inside the boundary.

I realize that there are other big businesses besides refining and petrochemical but we do need to say more than “Big Business” to be accurate.

Kermit on June 26, 2007 at 10:41 PM

Excellent point.

Some companies require English-speaking employees. Unfortunately, many do not. Examples of the latter commonly include:

***agriculture
***manufacturing companies
***companies involved in distribution, transportation
***landscaping
***retail companies
***service industry

Those are just the tip of the iceberg. And companies that hire illegals know that they do not have to pay any healthcare insurance. Instead, the employer just directs the illegal alien to the nearest emergency room where they receive free healthcare, ranging from outpatient and inpatient stays.

And people wonder why Emergency Rooms are packed full (standing room only) with patients who do not even have ER type of symptoms.

This is an abuse of the system.

ColtsFan on June 26, 2007 at 11:58 PM

Some companies require English-speaking employees. Unfortunately, many do not. Examples of the latter commonly include:

***agriculture
***manufacturing companies
***companies involved in distribution, transportation
***landscaping
***retail companies
***service industry

Those are just the tip of the iceberg. And companies that hire illegals know that they do not have to pay any healthcare insurance. Instead, the employer just directs the illegal alien to the nearest emergency room where they receive free healthcare, ranging from outpatient and inpatient stays.

ColtsFan on June 26, 2007 at 11:58 PM

Yes, and all of that will change under the amnesty bill, suddenly they WILL have to start paying taxes and insurance for all of those employees. So why would they be for it ? I am not convinced that business is pushing this, but that is “the story” that is being put out there.

So who is really pushing this bill ?

Maxx on June 27, 2007 at 12:19 PM

Good quesion, Maxx.

What set my hair on fire, was a illegal alien protester with a sign saying it is their land not ours. Oh, really! They made a shithole out Mexico and now they want to do it to the rest of the continent. Could they have come up with a Consitution like we have? Could they have built a country like we have? I don’ think so. Besides, I saw on TV on the history or discovery channel…that they now have proof that Europeans (from what is now France) were the first people to come to what is now America. In fact, it said the people traveled back and forth between the American and European continents, depending on the weather, ice etc.

mag5435 on June 27, 2007 at 12:36 PM

Yes, and all of that will change under the amnesty bill, suddenly they WILL have to start paying taxes and insurance for all of those employees. So why would they be for it ? I am not convinced that business is pushing this, but that is “the story” that is being put out there.

So who is really pushing this bill?

Maxx on June 27, 2007 at 12:19 PM

The reason they are “for it” is because there is no effective border security, thus guaranteeing that millions and millions of new illegal aliens will arrive illegally across our open and porous borders in the future. Not to mention visa over-stays.

The existing employers who already hire illegal aliens will then fire their illegals-turned newly Z visa-turned eventual voting USA citizens.

Then they will just hire the new illegals, or Visa over-stays.

Remember, Amnesty has already been given 7 times SINCE 1986. The businesses know what to do. Hire illegals, then fire them when they become USA citizens, then hire more illegals

After all, our government is encouraging them to do so.

ColtsFan on June 27, 2007 at 1:20 PM

The reason they are “for it” is because there is no effective border security, thus guaranteeing that millions and millions of new illegal aliens will arrive illegally across our open and porous borders in the future. Not to mention visa over-stays.

The existing employers who already hire illegal aliens will then fire their illegals-turned newly Z visa-turned eventual voting USA citizens.

Then they will just hire the new illegals, or Visa over-stays.

Remember, Amnesty has already been given 7 times SINCE 1986. The businesses know what to do. Hire illegals, then fire them when they become USA citizens, then hire more illegals

After all, our government is encouraging them to do so.

ColtsFan on June 27, 2007 at 1:20 PM

What you seem to be saying is that business is willing to spend large amounts of political capital and actual capital to lobby for this bill, so they can fire the illegal’s working for them now… just to hire new ones later. But they can do that with …. or without this bill. Doesn’t make sense.

And where and who is this well organized and cohesive group of disassociated businesses (except illegal labor) that has such sway with Congress? I’ve never heard of, or seen them before, yet they are able to make Congress and the President close their eyes to 75% of the electorate. Its strange that they could be so powerful yet so unknown and unseen. I appreciate your input, but I’m still far from convinced that its any association of businesses that is behind this.

Maxx on June 27, 2007 at 1:44 PM

What you seem to be saying is that business is willing to spend large amounts of political capital and actual capital to lobby for this bill, so they can fire the illegal’s working for them now… just to hire new ones later. But they can do that with …. or without this bill. Doesn’t make sense.

Maxx on June 27, 2007 at 1:44 PM

You are correct. This whole thing—shamnesty, no border enforcement, no punishment for Visa over-stays, etc—does not make any sense.

Its strange that they could be so powerful yet so unknown and unseen. I appreciate your input, but I’m still far from convinced that its any association of businesses that is behind this.

Maxx on June 27, 2007 at 1:44 PM

I appreciate your good comments. I intend to keep learning from others, including yourself. To be honest with you, I am still speechless on this whole thing. Your above quote sums up everything perfectly: “Doesn’t make sense.”

ColtsFan on June 27, 2007 at 1:53 PM

JustTruth101 on June 26, 2007 at 1:04 PM wrote:

“Bush thinks we need to merge US/Can/Mx to protect ourselves against the islamic tidal wave of violence which inevitably will come…”

I don’t think it’s about security, I think it’s about competition with the EU. But look what those countries (Britain, Germany, France, Denmark, …) have to put up with, wave after wave of Somalis, Pakistanis, Albanians… Can our government not see the similarities? We will also have wave after wave from underdeveloped countries, coming to be on OUR dole! … And hollering “racist!” “bigot!” when we start complaining about the expense.

A_Nonny_Mouse on June 27, 2007 at 9:13 PM

“Doesn’t make sense.” writes ColtsFan on June 27, 2007 at 1:53 PM

I’ve seen posts elsewhere linking this with the NAU (North American Union) and SPP (Security & Prosperity Partnership). Briefly: Globalization. Free movement of people, goods, money. A supranational ruling body. Loss of sovereignty. (“Nationalism? Patriotism? How quaint! {how archaic}.” )

I don’t know exactly how this huge super-multi-all-purpose bill forwards that agenda, but I’m not seeing any other reasonable explanations for this Congressional betrayal.

A_Nonny_Mouse on June 27, 2007 at 9:29 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5