Fred rolls out immigration plan: Enforcement by attrition
posted at 2:15 pm on October 23, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
A new CBS poll shows 53% of Democrats are satisfied that their candidates are addressing the relevant issues — compared to 14% of Republicans. This will help change that. There’s nothing not to like here, especially the centerpiece “enforcement by attrition” strategy that’s so often touted by strong borders advocates from Mark Krikorian to the boss herself. Shrewdly, there’s also a heavy emphasis on enforcing the law as it presently stands rather than passing a bunch of new mechanisms, which are simply not in the offing given the deep blue Congress Fred would almost certainly be saddled with. (A notable exception to that pragmatic approach: he wants to build and then expand the fence. It ain’t happening.) I could have done with more details about prosecuting criminal illegal aliens, too. As it is, all we get is “Deploy the additional assets outlined above to prosecute alien smugglers (’coyotes’), alien gang members, previously deported felons, and aliens who have repeatedly violated our immigration laws much more vigorously.” Whether Congress would be willing to pour money into that is uncertain but it’s enough of a hot potato that simply having the White House place it on the agenda would probably compel them to address it.
Share your take below. My skepticism’s reserved mainly for the second half, particularly the part about limiting family unification for legal immigrants. Retaining or even expanding that policy is a core ambition for the left (including Hillary) and one on which they won’t give ground easily. On the other hand, the rest of the plan seems to liberalize the requirements for legal immigration somewhat so maybe that would be a palatable trade-off for them. High fence/wide gate, just as many conservatives have so often asked for. Tancredo notably excepted.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
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: « Previous 1 2
Resistance is futile.
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 12:15 AM
cs, tommy, and bk
The Moe, Larry and Curly of HotAir.
techno_barbarian on October 24, 2007 at 1:23 AM
You, the ignorant misguided fool who takes the energy to attack the messenger when you should be using it to dig your head out of your a$$ and see “What’s a dollar?” for the lying terrorist supporting crook he is.
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 1:34 AM
That’s nice, I’d rather keep my soul.
Money ain’t sh*t compared to integrity………..
omnipotent on October 24, 2007 at 2:36 AM
And being called psychotic by csd is THE pinnacle of compliments!
(it’s like having Cindy Seahag hate you)
omnipotent on October 24, 2007 at 2:39 AM
Notice! tommylotto of HA is a big, smarter than your average Southern Tommy, more-than-you-money-making lawyer.
omnipotent, you might have a cool HA handle, but your earning power is nothing, in relative class action settling terms.
Entelechy on October 24, 2007 at 3:00 AM
I wonder if Fred was worried about that when he was giving advice to terrorists, lobbying for dictators, abortion clinics, against the victims of asbestos poisoning, and funneling cash to his son?
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 3:23 AM
DILLIGAFF ?
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 8:52 AM
Still having trouble with spelling, Tommy?
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 8:56 AM
You know, depending on what happens in the next 12 months, people here are either going to vote for Fred, not vote for him, wished he’d have won the primary, or not. Only two people here, however, are so blindly insane with Fred hatred. Let me spell it out for you, guys.
When one person thinks he’s rational and everyone else is insane, he’s usually wrong. When two people think they’re rational and everyone else is insane, their names are csdeven and tommylotto.
MadisonConservative on October 24, 2007 at 8:57 AM
I liked it better the first way.
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 9:01 AM
Had to laugh at that one. But they do make it soooo easy….
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 9:02 AM
Ouch. That had to have hurt.
I’ll give csd some credit though, even though Fred ran over his dog (or was it a cat) with that red pickup, causing him to go slightly askew when Fred is mentioned, he has two sons in the military defending his, and our, rights of debate.
Tommylotto, however, seems to be just another scumbag lawyer. :)
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 9:16 AM
So, if the Republican nominee is Fred, you will vote for her?
Who will she pardon in her last day in office? Bin Laden? Hsu? The other “bundlers” of her campaign? All of the above?
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 9:30 AM
Fred would have spelled “borders” corretly.
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 9:35 AM
Should have used preview that time…
“correctly.”
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 9:36 AM
“Hoist on my own petard.”
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 9:36 AM
So, you’re using sheer nubers to PROVE you are right? I know for a fact that the people who crucified Christ felt the same way. But we know how that worked out don’t we?
The guy willingly, knowingly, helped terrorists avoid justice for 11 years. This allowed them to pass their knowledge on to others of the same ilk.
Attacking us doesn’t mitigate who Fred has chosen to associate himself with.
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 9:51 AM
We all been there bro. I have complained about a preview or edit feature for months. Now that I have it, I fail to use it about half the time.
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 9:53 AM
No, I’m making a point about two raving lunatics who get down and dirty with anyone who disagrees with them, calling them “groupies” because they don’t rabidly revile someone as much as you do. I think you’d find more appropriate bedfellows at such as DU.
MadisonConservative on October 24, 2007 at 9:56 AM
Why don’t you dig your head out of your a$$ and re-read this and see who starts making the personal attacks?
Try here….
The fact is that there are a few of us who expose Fred for the lying scumbag fake he is. The next thing we know is that you and your ilk are attacking us. You are convicted by your owns words. You lose.
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 10:12 AM
Oh, so “you-know-who” is a personal attack now? Or was the personal attack using the words “scumbag lobbyist”, despite the fact we lost count of the number of times you slathered it on the economy debate thread? Tell me how it was a personal attack, if you can see through your sheer hatred of anyone who doesn’t think Fred is the antichrist?
MadisonConservative on October 24, 2007 at 10:21 AM
You are making assumptions. I do not name people like you do. “Groupies” is a general term that does not name anyone specifically. You expose yourself as a groupie by getting a$$ broke about it.
IE: Someone uses the term Rudy McRomney “nut job”. I happen to think two of the three are acceptable and I am not a nut job, so the person obviously is not speaking about me so there is no need to get upset.
You on the other hand, read the word Fred “groupie” and then pop up here defending yourself. You obviously think you are a Fred groupie and since that is the case, who am I to argue with you about it?
Fred IS a scumbag lobbyist by virtue of the people he chose to associate with. You can’t defend him, so you chose to take offense so that you can convince yourself it is OK to attack me.
You’re out of your league dude. Go back to the minors.
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 11:21 AM
I come here to have fun debating groupies for the worst candidate for either party in the history of this nation (Fred — Benedict Arnold would have been worse, but he never ran). I do not come here to brag about my hat size, height, or wallet. I make a comment about Fred and in support of Rudy, so automatically I’m assumed by the bigots on this board to be a little New Yorker. So, I set him straight, I’m a big Texan. I make a comment about Fred and instead of responding about the substance of my comment, my business gets insulted. However, I’m doing quite fine, thank you. I am the victim of egregious mean spirited attacks based on wrong assumptions, then you critize me for demonstrating my critics are ignorant arshats.
I am still waiting for a Fredhead to attempt to defend the very specific open border votes Fred made on behalf of his open border buddy Abraham here.
Still waiting, chumps….
tommylotto on October 24, 2007 at 11:24 AM
sonnyspats1 on October 22, 2007 at 4:33 PM
You are confusing “leadership” for Fred’s cranky snide jabs at those who expose him for the terrorist supporting abortion lobbyist he is. The guy is an empty suit filled with vague platitudes and talking points stuffed in him by his wife.
csdeven on October 22, 2007 at 6:04 PM
Vague platitudes indeedy! BWAAAAHAHAHAHA!
sonnyspats1 on October 24, 2007 at 11:30 AM
Do you really just ignore things that show what a fraud you are? Either address this, or quit responding to me:
MadisonConservative on October 24, 2007 at 11:31 AM
Yea-up, having a keyboard that “misspells” words doesn’t help either.
Keep it light, mate.
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 11:31 AM
I’ll clear it up for you:
Voicing expectations of either your attack of a candidate, your choice of words, or disagreeing with you are not attacks.
Get it through your head.
MadisonConservative on October 24, 2007 at 11:33 AM
Ladies and Laddies, it has been another amusing thread. Night night, one and all. Please remember, except for the trolls amoungst us, we should be all voting for the Republican candidate in November next year. Please keep our discussions civil. We should be all on the same side.
And once again, God bless our troops and Commander in Chief.
Texas Nick 77 on October 24, 2007 at 11:41 AM
It ain’t a compliment fool AND you are specifically referring to me. You can’t defend Fred so you attack me.
Get that through your head.
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 12:06 PM
If a comment isn’t a compliment, it doesn’t make it an attack. Referring to you is not an attack. This is an attack: You are deranged.
MadisonConservative on October 24, 2007 at 12:10 PM
This is like the third time you’ve called the commenters on this site bigots, one way and another. It’s getting tiresome. If you don’t like the company here, why don’t you do yourself a favor and go play somehwere else.
jaime on October 24, 2007 at 12:11 PM
Every time I post, I try to redirect the discussion to Fred’s voting history of support for his buddy / campaign manager Abraham’s open borders policies. I explain how his voting history is inconsistent with his sudden tough stance on immigration. Unlike Rudy, Fred was actually in a position as a US Senator to do something about the unchecked immigration that flooded cities like NYC with 400,000 illegals. Fred did nothing. In fact, if you look at all of the votes I specified in my prior post — he voted repeatedly to give away US jobs to foreign nationals, granted amnesty to a million Nicaraguans and voted against doing away with the visa lottery.
If you have read any of my prior posts defending the claim against Rudy that he ran a sanctuary city, you will note that I cited the fact that NYC reported all criminal illegal aliens and reported more illegals than the feds were willing to deport. The problem was the feds. Fred was the feds. Fred was the problem.
So, stop attacking me and csdeven and try to defend the prior actions of that sorryarsh scumbag candidate of yours or stop posting on these threads.
tommylotto on October 24, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Until you stop labelling disagreement as attacking you, and until you quit making yourselves the biggest hypocrites in the world by calling us bigots and then telling us to stop attacking you, shut the hell up. I’ve had it with your crap. Stop now.
MadisonConservative on October 24, 2007 at 12:32 PM
Is that an order? If so, I’ll excuse myself immediately. Well, maybe not.
As to your other comments about Thompson, you have a point. He has his problems. As does Giuliani. But you seem to be taking the discussion too personally. To the point of calling the other commenters bigots. Thompson or Giuliani (or both) are going to be out of it after the Republican Convention next year. You may want to stay here and communicate with some of these people afterward. Some things are easy to forget. Calling people bigots is not.
And I don’t think it helps your current argument, either.
jaime on October 24, 2007 at 12:47 PM
Someone who presumes that I am a little New Yorker with no understanding of the Southern mind just because I defend Rudy from unfounded allegations and attack Fred for his apparently admitted weaknesses would, in my definition, be a bigot. A bigot makes assumptions based on incomplete information and stereotypes. If you did none of those things, I was not referring to you. If you did, and the shoe fits, wear it.
If you want to debate the merits of Fred, the worst man ever to run for POTUS, I’m ready willing and able. If you want to avoid his obvious weaknesses, pretend he has no history, gobble up his red meat slopp like a deluded groupie, and attack the mere messenger with personal mean spirited insults, then you had better have thicker skin than to be offended by being called a bigot.
I’ve been told to piss off, called soulless, accused of being unemployed, and called a scumbag lawyer all because I dare to point out that before Fred was the great white knight charging in on his nobel steed to save Conservativism and the American way, he had no accomplishment of any real significance and lobbied for unsavory clients, was part of the defense team for terrorists and has a long history of supporting Abraham’s open borders policy. Fred is a horrible candidate in so many ways, yet he’s perceived as da MAN by people unaware of or intentionally obtuse about his entire personal history.
tommylotto on October 24, 2007 at 1:47 PM
So, disagree with the argument and stop attacking us. There is no reason for you to even mention a specific person if you are serious about discussing the topic of the thread. Especially the way you refer to folks.
The fact is you choose to fixate on me rather than discuss the topic of the thread. Why you do that is curiously disturbing. As we can see, you are still engaged in it.
Fred is a lowlife scumbag who associates with other low life scumbags and tries to explain it away by claiming it was part of his personal life.
Now, there is your opportunity to address the topic. But it’s abundantly clear that you wont do that will ya?
csdeven on October 24, 2007 at 2:07 PM
This is why I stoped posting to TommyLotto. He “debates” by insulting, then whines that he is being insulted when you best him.
Gatordoug on October 24, 2007 at 5:42 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2