Captain's Quarters -

interesting...

thanks for the fine post.

in regard to 'hardliner' reaction...

perhaps this should be reason enough to vote in 2008 for the GOP, because you will need a President to enforce the law, and Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party are simply not going to bother.

Hey, look! Ed is trying to prove that you really can shine a turd.

Cap'n Ed wrote:

Here's the problem with the hard-liner arguments, which amounts to "they'll never engage the border-security and workplace enforcement portions." Well, that could be true of any immigration bill, even if it completely matched the conservative position on immigration. It's an argument that only supports no action whatsoever on illegal immigration, including border controls. In fact, it applies to everything Congress passes. If that's our concern, it's an argument for non-engagement in the legislative process -- which necessarily works through making compromises that the majority in the end can support.

It's a sad thing when we EXPECT that our government won't enforce the laws passed by Congress with their willing acquiescence.

Hey! Maybe we can get the government to not enforce tax laws! Think that Congress will go along with that?

/sarcasm

This package is better than doing nothing.

Not much better, but it's a better program than what we have now. And lets not pretend these illegals will be easy to find and send home. They're not. We don't even know their names. That's why I've always said that a forge-proof biometric ID for everyone living in the USA, citizen or not, is the only way to go. That's how you sort people out. That's how you "control inventory" when inventory gets to large and unmanageable to sort out any other way.

And the nice thing about laws is that they can be amended and improved later, if and when the composition of the Congress is improved later.

On balance, it's better than doing nothing. And that's our only other option with a Democrat Congress.

"perhaps this should be reason enough to vote in 2008 for the GOP, "

I had precisely the opposite thought. Anyway, good luck getting any GOP candidates elected in 08. GOP to pay again, as it did in 06.

It doesn't matter, Ed.

The bottom line is that millions of people already in the country illegally will be given amnesty.

It does nothing substantial to stop additional illegals from flowing in from Mexico.

In effect, it is throwing the towel in with the express purpose of trying to create a new GOP voting bloc. Nothing more. Nothing less. It's the kind of thing I expect from the Democrats: the party that refuses to believe there is any sort of national security threat in illegal border crossings.

But coming from the GOP? I guarantee you this will cause a major uprising among the base. And we're not going to accept it.

If this becomes law, we will replace those who made it so.

Here's the problem with the hard-liner arguments, which amounts to "they'll never engage the border-security and workplace enforcement portions." Well, that could be true of any immigration bill, even if it completely matched the conservative position on immigration. It's an argument that only supports no action whatsoever on illegal immigration, including border controls

Let's say the options are: A. Enforce the laws B. Ignore the laws or C. Change the laws.

Hardliners want A and do not want C.

It seems you're saying hardliners should be okay with C because otherwise they're stuck with B.

Seeing the results of the Reagan amnesty deal, I'd rather have the status quo (B) than repeat the message that we don't take our laws seriously (C). But it would be nice if we actually did what we have said we would do (A).

RE: brooklyn (May 17, 2007 1:06 PM)
"...because you will need a President to enforce the law..."

We need one now. It's kind of difficult to condemn Hillary! or the Democrat Party now given the dereliction of duty this President has exercised WRT immigration law/enforcement.

Whatever shade of lipstick gets put on this pig, it is still a capitulation whereby 1) no increased border enforcement will actually occur (though we might get better pictures of the persons crossing the border), 2) where massive amnesty Part N will pave the way for amnesty Part N+1 in 12 years, 3) where legal citizens will be saddled with both unfunded mandates of a baby boom generation plus millions who haven't been contributing to the social safety nets for adequate time, and 4) where any restrictions to regulate/control the process will either be watered down in committees at a later date or tacitly ignored by the agencies tasked with enforcing policy.

Congratulations, America! Enjoy your screwing. The politicians sure will.

Folks, you might want to consider endorsing Tancredo or Hunter (or other) now rather than McCain, Romney, or Giuliani since someone is going to need to enforce an immigration law or two at some point.

Anyone who believes that the enforcement measures will be implemented is a damn fool.

"But coming from the GOP? I guarantee you this will cause a major uprising among the base. And we're not going to accept it."

That worked out great during the '06 elections. "Mad as hell" Republicans stayed home or voted Democrat, so now you have bills like this. Splendid work. Just outstanding.

The minority party has to make deals - you checklist "conservatives" wanted a GOP minority, so enjoy what you so shall reap.

Remember, brave Americans died so you can get cranky and vote for the worst possible candidate, just to "send a message" to whomever didn't fill in your silly checklist.

The Capt pretty much summed up my concerns....They passed a pretty modest border fence last year and have funded about none of it. I simply do not believe them on this issue.

If they want to fix the mess make mandatory border fence completion dates before the first illegal gets legalized...Build, as in complete, 800 miles of wall and then we begin the normalization process.

Instead we have a promise, from politicians, of enforcement and a wall....That is worth about as much as a confederate dollar.

The Capt pretty much summed up my concerns....They passed a pretty modest border fence last year and have funded about none of it. I simply do not believe them on this issue.

If they want to fix the mess make mandatory border fence completion dates before the first illegal gets legalized...Build, as in complete, 800 miles of wall and then we begin the normalization process.

Instead we have a promise, from politicians, of enforcement and a wall....That is worth about as much as a confederate dollar.

"That worked out great during the '06 elections. "Mad as hell" Republicans stayed home or voted Democrat, so now you have bills like this. Splendid work. Just outstanding. '

Sorry NoDonkey..you forget that our fine republican senate produced a similiar piece of dung last year. It does not matter who is in charge with this issue for our Amnesty and Cheap labor RINO's will sell us out as fast as the dems will.

The 'hold my nose and vote' strategy the party tried last time, as you note, didn't work. Perhaps its time for the party to do what we sent them to Washington to do for a change.

And again Ed the real issue here is national security. "This is the best we can accept from this Congress" is *not* a valid excuse for failing to secure our borders.

Did the Fort Dix Six not teach us anything? How long were those brothers in the country illegally? A dozen years or more? Would the amnesty deal reached have given them citizenship?

We cannot accept anything less than a real law that prioritizes border security as a domestic national security interest. This is not negotiable in a post 9/11 world, Ed.

This deal is pure garbage. It is unacceptable. Period. The current laws must be enforced. New laws and measures must be added. Will it take a mushroom cloud over San Diego to convince America that this is a vital program?

I pray not.

Pardon me for asking what some would deem a rather impertinent question, but ...

Is it me, or this Congress really that stupid to believe that the 12 million illegals here now will suddenly start abiding by this law when they haven't given a rat's behind about our laws to date?

Furthermore, I wouldn't sign onto this bill unless I had a guarantee that enforcement and improved security comes FIRST before any regularization occurs.

This is what could happen next:

1) This bill (with at least SOME obstacles to citizenship) passes and gets signed into law by the President.

2) Conservatives get so upset with Bush and the moderate Republicans that they either stay home in 2008, or vote 3rd Party.

3) President Rodham, and an even more Democrat Congress "fix" the law Bush signed, to eliminate ANY obstacles and long waits for citizenship.

That seems like a good prediction of what's going to happen next. But, when conservatives watch President Rodham do #3, they better blame themselves for #2.

RE: Lightwave (May 17, 2007 2:13 PM)
Will it take a mushroom cloud over San Diego to convince America that this is a vital program?

Simply, yes. I wonder if even one cloud would be enough.

We are in the process of creating a transcontinental highway from Mexico to Canada with trucks originating from Mexican companies in Mexico getting full access to the U.S. highway system. Sections of this highway are already being designed and built as are property grabs to bridge the gaps. Some cities are fighting both to attract and reroute the superhighway to benefit their own situation. The trucks are already pouring over in a "trial run" though this is superficial political cover for a plan whose end has already been determined. Elsewhere, container scanning has proven to be inadequate or improperly enforced.

Couple source carrier, highway, illegal alien (amnestied or not), unenforced law, derelict Executive, complicit Legislative, congested Judicial, and WMD from anywhere in the world post 9/11 - the writing is already on the wall.

The bomb is ticking, be it combustible nuclear or dirty.

RMBN,

Put Ms. Rodham and her lunatic staff in the White House and we'll have a lot bigger fish to fry, than illegal immigrants.

Like higher taxes. At what rate do you think the new Caliphate will tax us Dhimmis?

Captain Ed,
So can I say I told you so in five years when border security does not happen and have millions of more illegals. I have to say its pretty naive to expect Bush to have stringent border security. We have what 2 mile of the 700 miles of approved fencing what 6 months. I generally agree Republicans are going to get wiped out in '08. I hate to admit it, but he is working out as well for us as Nixon did. Unfortunely we don't some one like Ronald Reagan waiting in the wings to pick up the pieces.

Mega Rino Arlen Spectre: It is not amnesty. This will restore the rule of law."

Looks like Ed's been smoking some of Arlen's stash.

Re: NoDonkey at May 17, 2007 2:31 PM

Don't worry. When the economy tanks, and you lose your job, your taxes will go down. :-)

"when conservatives watch President Rodham do #3, they better blame themselves for #2."

No, I'll blame the GOP phonies who voted for the bill and signed it into law (see your #1).

GOP cooked in 08, unless its nominee actively opposes Bush, Kennedy and the open borders crowd now selling this 'compromise'.

There are no "border first triggers", you idiot.

RIP GOP.

Re: james23 at May 17, 2007 2:41 PM

If that's your attitude, better practice saying, "Madam President," or "Your Highness." Whichever she prefers.

"When the economy tanks, and you lose your job, your taxes will go down. :-)"

My job's pretty secure. Diane Feinstein's hubby will see to it, I've been told.

i said over a year ago that we would know how serious washington was about illegal immigration by the order that they addressed the problem. sadly this supposed compromise is absolutely no different that all the previous ones going back 40 years. in fact some of the language is exactly the same. even the 700 miles of fence has been discarded. the electronic fence is simply a counting mechanism--it does not, and i repeat, does not stop illegal immigration, it simply counts the numbers that cross. all the provisions of this compromise will be argued in court by amnesty groups, meanwhile the border remains completely open. by allowing immediate spouses and children to migrate it will boost the 12-15 million illegals to 40-45 million.

if they wanted to truly address the issue, as the barbara jordan commission 1990-95 so stated, all they have to do is build this fence:

http://www.weneedafence.com/images/Fence_Idea.jpg

with a committed effort this fence would take a year. then they could discuss all this other baloney. the fact is the fence will never get built, the restrictions will be thrown out in court, the illegals will all get green cards/citizenship, no money will ever be paid and they will all qualify for medicare and social security--including their spouses and children who will be allowed in the country immediately after the courts allow it. mexico will then be completely hollowed out creating a third world sh*thole immediately to our south. a problem far larger then the one today. we have been draining mexico of any hope it has had these last 20 years. without its young it has no chance of a revolution that finally breaks the back of the 300 year old ruling families that have corrupted mexico since spanish times.

our best hope lies in the house.

without a fence (not electronic) across the entire border there is no hope of any resolution.

RMBN,

"3) President Rodham, and an even more Democrat Congress "fix" the law Bush signed, to eliminate ANY obstacles and long waits for citizenship."

You forgot "Step 4": Civil war erupts.

While we are on the subject of pandering, looks like Hillary has claimed the prized Jenna Jameson endorsement.

Little Miss Sunday School from Oak Park, IL proudly displays the endorsement on her website.

http://justhillary.com/herwords/jenna0517.php

"Big Tent" (which is French/Kerry for compromise) is okay when you have a majority, it means you reach across the aisle to "get things done."

As the minority party Big Tent means smiling at the podium while holding a silver metal.

It is hard to imagine a scenario, outside of an episode of "24" (or the Brit Hume hypothetical), where Republicans prevail in 08.

Don't waste your money. George Soros can has and will outspend all of us several times over.

Thanks a lot, McCain. (Mr. Big Tent).

Ed - this agreement is a joke and the GOP will suffer from it - they better smooze many Jose's and Maria's to make up for all the Americans who will desert them.

The problem with immigration (legal and illegal) is the numbers. The numbers are so high and assimilation (including English language) is not encouraged, plus rampant fraud in the Latino communtiy (ID's, visas, social security fraud, income tax evasion, etc.)

This is just a deal between the elites of Mexico and our elites - the American people are left in the cold, wondering why this is happening, why their schools, hospitals and hometowns are quickly turning into Tijuana.

speaking of fraud, there will be thousands of instant millionaires created all throughout mexico's small hamlets as thousands of small time bureaucrats print phony marriage and birth certificates showing that most of the illegals here are married with two or three children. of course we are going to stop that by dna testing tens of millions of people when we can't even get dna testing done in simple murder cases!

by the time the courts are done with this compromise any checking, criminal or otherwise, will be deemed a violation of their human rights. in fact mexico will probably argue the case for them.

something else is going on here and it has nothing to do with immigration.

This is awful.

Doing nothing and waiting for a better President and Congress is considerably better than passing a bad law.

Looks like Newt is the first GOP candidate, other than McVain, who is cooked, to figure out where a GOP candidate needs to be on this, if he wishes to survive in 08.

"A sellout of every conservative principal" is what Newt has called the bill announced today.

Jim DeMint is good, too.

Have to credit the goodguys, while we are identifying and calling out the bad ones.

Hmm. This stuff is good to kick around but their "reform" will never work. Here's why
Why Immgration Reform Won't work

Hmm. This stuff is good to kick around but their "reform" will never work. Here's why
Why Immgration Reform Won't work

I work for the welfare department. I'm set for life.

I truly do not understand why the USA does not simply take over Mexico, instead of allowing Mexico to take over the USA. Hmmm?

Seriously. You guys need someone like Andy Jackson as president. (Don't we all!)

The beauty of this Kennedy McCain immigration bill from the Democrats perspective is that they get what they want (amnesty) AND they get to blame it on Bush.

Best of all the media doesn't even have to change their "its Bush's fault" template.

Rich Lowery nails it:
"This is the key thing to understand about the immigration deal—the amnesty effectively happens no matter what. As soon as the bill is signed into law illegal immigrants get probationary legal status. Before any of the enforcement happens. So the ordering is exactly the same as 1986—amnesty first, enforcement later. Maybe you trust the Bush administration and Chertoff to follow through on the enforcement (although the chances are that you don't). But will you trust the Democratic administration we will probably have in two years and its secretary of homeland security? This has disaster written all over it."

I'm not totally against an immigration bill that allows for guest workers, but not if it allows for amnesty for everyone (though I'm not sure in fact if it does. i'm hearing a lot of screaming, but not a lot in the way of particulars about actual details).
We need a guest worker program so we can actually track people coming in and out of the country, so in that regard its a good thing.

Of course, if illegals do jobs that americans wont do, and we then make a large majority of them americans, will they still do the jobs that americans wont do? Then, if the argument is that we need these workers for certain types of jobs, and americans (who used to be illegal) will no longer do them, we'd need a constant influx of new illegal workers to fill the jobs that the previous illegals worked at, but who no longer do beause they are now citizens.
Again, I don't know the details as to how many people are going to be granted amnesty, and the details,and most people who are railing about betrayal and never voting for repubs again don't either. But it does sound fishy to me.

Guest worker program yes. Path to citizenship no.
But to echo NoDonkey, this is an issue that can be blamed at least partly on the conservatives who sought to teach the bozos a lesson because they weren't pure enough. Are the democrats bettter? Having more democrats who control a majority of both houses is going to teach them a lesson? That's cutting off your nose to spite your face. The house was what was holding the line on immigration, the house got gutted becuase of defectors and complainers not voting, and now the hard liners are mad that the conservatives have to make concessions on immigration.
That;s politics, but when you're playing with a bad hand, you can only do so much. If the argument is to stop voting for conservatives all together because of this betrayal, then be prepared for years and years of liberalism that will be shoved down your throat. You want conservatives to hold the line, yet when push came to shove the hardliners demanding conservative purity didn't hold the line and keep the conservatives in the majority.
So now you get to deal with the dems in the majority and all that that entails. Welcome to the jungle.

If this passes, as it looks it will, the GOP has assigned itself minority status for at least the next 20 years. Hispanics are not going to vote for GOP candidates in any substantial numbers. And congressional GOP members who voted for it will be long gone and drawing their nice retirement packages we paid for. What is in the D.C. water supply that imbues Beltway politicians with what they think is 20/20 vision when they're actually legally blind?

Well, if this bill has the touchback provision, and it has the Z-visa and the formal guest-worker program, and really secures the border, then it meets his requirements ... doesn't it?

No. It grants illegals a provisional right to be here which is something the people back where they came from don't get.

Brilliant!!

We can't put the fire out anyway, so let's throw more gas on it - yeah, that's the ticket.

Gee Ed . . . I never figured you for somebody that doesn't get it. Every amnesty related act by our ball washing congress has resulted in an explosion of illegal immigration. But you already knew that . . . hense, you don't care about border security or stopping this insanity. And I don't care to read your blog anymore. Vergüenza en usted. Adiós.

If I'm an illegal immigrant (hypothetical) and I'm working as a night janitor for example, and I'm using a phony resident alien card and phony social security card, my life changes not one bit if this bill gets killed by Tom Tancredo & Co. As far as my employer is concerned, everything's in order if this bill gets killed. He made sure I had the documents. He did the minimum he was required to do by law. Kill this bill, and he's happy.

My life, and his life, ONLY change if a new forge-proof ID system goes in place that my employer is REQUIRED to verify in a national database. If this bill is killed, and I'm illegal (still hypothetical) then I'm cheering Tancredo, and my life goes on as always. He killed the bill that would make me prove who I am to keep working. I'm going to name my next new little American citizen Tom, in his honor.

Base to Congress - Don't do that or you'll lose us.

Congress to Base - I don't believe you.

That's what happened before the 06 elections, and that's what's happened here. Frankly if we can't elect smarter Congressmen than that, we don't deserve any power.

Demonizing "hardliners" by blaming us for losing in 06. Nice.

It has been said that elections are won by energizing your base and demoralizing your opponents base.

Passing this Immigration bill doesn't really serve to energize Democrats, connect the dots.

RE: RBMN (May 17, 2007 4:44 PM)
My life, and his life, ONLY change if a new forge-proof ID system goes in place that my employer is REQUIRED to verify in a national database...

Or we could enforce existing law, arrest those who continue to employ illegal aliens in the most egregious ways (even if it's in an imperfect and somewhat ad hoc basis), stop sanctuary cities from flipping the bird to current law, finish building the fence (however inadequate) that had already been approved, and quit reassigning Border Patrol agents to defend Iraq and keep them here to defend America.

That might change a few lives appropriately and immediately and protect the interests of legal Americans without going through any extraordinary steps at all.

No deal is better than this deal. This bill is a win for Ted Kennedy. Why would anyone in their right mind want Ted Kennedy to win?

Re: AnonymousDrivel at May 17, 2007 5:00 PM

Existing laws, that employers live under, are UNENFORCEABLE, as I've tried to explain many times in this forum. Employers have a BIG GIANT GAPING LOOPHOLE, that they happily make use of. Leave things the way they are now, and they're happy as clams.

I now support the immediate start of Impeachment hearings of GWB and Dick Cheany.
Anything to stop this amnesty from moving forward. Now that he has sold out America, and he has, screw Bush and the horse he rode in on!

Re: TrueLiberal at May 17, 2007 5:24 PM

The ONE GUY who has never changed his position on this is George W. Bush. He's been pro-guest-worker since before 2000. If you're looking for someone who's played bait and switch, he's not it. He's never changed his public position ever.

The key here is to (1) end citizenship for children born to illegals and (2) deny all public services to illegals, including schools, drivers licenses, and health care. And, when they come to the attention of the authorities for any reason, deport them immediately - as soon as illegal status is established, back they go.

Then on a random basis, require all employers with more than 5 employees to verify citizenship and submit the documents to the government under penalty of mandatory jail time and confiscation of assets.

This bill is a disaster.

RE: RBMN (May 17, 2007 5:10 PM)
Existing laws, that employers live under, are UNENFORCEABLE...

And that remains a copout peddled by those who would prefer the status quo of not managing their personnel properly or of trying to avoid any associated costs of such a business expense. Punish the worst offenders adequately and management will find ways to ensure that they perform due diligence to see that they employ legal citizens. Yes, an occasional, improper hiring can be overlooked and rectified either by an appeal, a fine, or a warning, but not the mass abuse we observe routinely.

Institutional illegal hirings are not "accidental" or due to forged documents, for example. Companies know very well their personnel, and the worst offenders know damn well they are exploiting illegal workers. They count on illegals remaining mute on their status to enforce poor working conditions/environment and lower wage rates.

Also, there is a program where companies can voluntarily research SS# before a hire. Any company that performs this ritual religiously will earn some good-faith credit that it is trying to abide by the law should any legal action be taken against them. Any company that avoids such a program will not earn such credit and will get extra scrutiny should they run into the enforcement gauntlet.

Laws are unenforceable only by people who choose not to enforce them whether mandated by a governmental authority or by industry management. An equitable penance can be assigned depending on degree of abuse, but at some point, penance must be tried regardless of the risk that the system is imperfect. Adding another layer of laws to the current layers means absolutely nothing if no law is ever enforced.

Why not dispense with the whole labor regulation and/or illegal alien concept and say "Hey, we just don't care. C'mon in, the water's fine." At least that would be honest. Stupid, but honest. And it would doom any politician who advanced it, which is why we repeatedly get these disingenuous frauds of legislation paraded ad nauseum as new sliced bread. It isn't. It's the same moldy crap we heard under Reagan... only worse.

Start counting down now for the 2020 amnesty and a new Federal agency to check IDs... and I'm certain that one will work. Look! New sliced bread.

If this bill passes, American citizens must realize that the elites of Mexico and our United States have declared war on the American people and will be using the amnestied illegals and expanded legal immigration to wage it.

What we have happening now, and it will accelerate, is a replacement of the population of the US with anyone-but-us. The fundamental nature of this country and its customs and laws will be changed irrevocably once the third-worlders get a firm grasp on the levers of the vote. According to Michael Barone's article in the WSJ, our demographics are already changing, with the influx mainly composed of 'immigrants' into the cities which are liberal Democratic strongholds. The more conservative sectors of the country are receiving those Democrats fleeing the cities, but they are bringing their liberal voting habits with them.

Many states, including North Carolina, are now making legislative moves to move from electoral college procedure as it is done now to instead award those votes based on the popular vote. Large population centers will control those votes, regardless of how the rest vote.

Third-world nationals living here now have no desire to learn our language and we are not teaching them our history or constitution. They are and will continue to be in favor of socialist policies, which benefit the uneducated and unskilled to the detriment of tax-paying and productive Americans. If American candidates running for office won't fork over the largesse, they'll elect people from their own cohort who will.

There will come a day soon where more and more socialist policies will be enacted through law and there will be nothing we will be able to do about it.

If this passes, Republicans, and more importantly, conservatives are done. In 50 years, this country will be unrecognizable.

Re: AnonymousDrivel at May 17, 2007 5:47 PM

Sorry. Mindreading is not admissible in court. The law needs to be changed to make every employer authenticate, as well as just observe the documents.

I agree with NoDonkey. I am incensed about what McCain and the "dem-lite" RINOS have done. But while this whole thing stinks like a feedlot, Hillary and the maggots will be far worse. I think MarkJ may have something with Point #4. We get closer every year and I find myself less and less dismayed by that prospect as our intellectually superior "elite" demands imposition of their enlightened values and rushes, in their unappreciated benevolence, to protect us from our pitiful selves. Time to bring back the guillotine and array the unwashed knitters and common men in the front row.

"That seems like a good prediction of what's going to happen next. But, when conservatives watch President Rodham do #3, they better blame themselves for #2."

Yes,yes,yes,it's all our fault for not holding our noses and voting for a Republican party every bit as pro-open border and pro-amnesty as those dastardly Democomucratistas.
The GOP has had 27 years in power and accomplised.......a few,temporary tax cuts and soem business deregulation.

and that's about it,these hacks couldn't even kill the national endowment for the arts!!!

If you cant kill the NEA while holding the WH and majorities in both houses,then anything serious is clearly beyond them.

They have blundered,bumbled and squandered every opportunity given them and frankly
I'm tired of being bitch slapped by these punks as their most significant acheivments have been dismantling the Reagan coalition and overturning Reagan's legacy.

Screw'em.

Talking about the border fence, Penn and Teller did a very funny routine. For their "Bull shit" Program. Dunno where it airs; but I saw this with a link that took me to U-Tube.

Okey dokey. They hire illegals. And, they bring them to a spot that looks like its the border. And, they ask these men to "build a fence." Just like the ones the patriots are planning. It's got beams going down into the ground. And, corrugated materials on both sides. And, barbed wires on top.

After a full day's work, the fence is built. And, Penn and Teller divide the six men into three groups. And, set the timer.

It was their jobs to have:

TEAM ONE: GO OVER THE FENCE

TEAM TWO: WAS TO GO UNDER THE FENCE

TEAM THREE: THROUGH THE FENCE

And, the race was on.

The guys digging under got in second. The ones cutting through made it through first. And, within six minutes time, the two that leapt up one wall, and over the barbed wire, to gall to the ground on the other sice, came in 3rd.

Pretty stupid to build fences, if they're no defense to trespassers.

How much experience do the Mexicans have "walking into America?" By now? More than a hundred years worth. Called Wet Backs, before, because they swam the Rio Grande.

Immigration is threatening only because the Saud's had "instant visas." Men never had to show up to be a part of long lines. They applied in Riyadh. And, American personnel in the embassy over there was not even allowed to compare the paperwork to the faces.

That's how the Saud's got the 9/11 killers IN.

As to politics, we're a very large country. If you think the right wing brand applies, I'd doubt it. And, hating the people you have to work with in congress; isn't exactly a "leading technique" IF you want to succeed.

The terror still comes at us, unabated. It's paid for by the shieks in Riyadh. Hard to believe, huh? Well, they pay billions to top American advertising and marketeering firms, to keep you "informed" that wahabbism is a religion of peace.

While, yes. Bush has put the GOP on the ropes. Man doesn't listen much to counter-proposals. He had directions, where he was going to lead this country. Including to be sure to put our diplomatic stamp on a palestinian state.

And, if he could get away with it, Condi would be in the Mideast, forcing Israel to accept the AMERICAN DESIGNED LUNACY that Israel has to tear down her vcheckpoints, so the palestinians can have easier access to do terror.

Handling terror will probably turn out to be local events. In some situations where gated communities will arise. And, free freeways will give way to toll booths. All the better to protect us?

NO. It's the purpose of government to tax.

So, I guess legalizing the immigrants who are here is one way to change some of the pictures.

Which ones? The ones that occur in the voting booths. When right wingers meet just about everybody else whose voting.

Try understanding that people who want those votes are gonna try to convince the MOST PEOPLE POSSIBLE that their ticket should win.

What's in congress now? TWO PERCENT.

You call that a working majority?

Well, it's a thin margin. But it gives you all the levers you need to run things.

Until lots of people change their minds.

Amnesty and college education for everyone!

New Massive Budget with more social goodies for everyone!

This is life in the BushHitlers Amerikkka?

I am confused.

RE: RBMN (May 17, 2007 5:55 PM)
Sorry. Mindreading is not admissible in court...

What mind reading? Did Company X try to authenticate SS# on its employees or not? If so, what percentage? If not, why not? How many employees existed during some review period and what percentage of their workforce in time period T was illegal?

There's no mind reading here. The employer has broken the law. The employee has broken the law. About that there is no debate. The debate might come in the degree of restitution required of the employer given their labor force, period of law-breaking, degree of law breaking, and provable evidence that they tried to validate with a third party the legal status of its employees. When an audit confirms that illegal aliens were employed, the employer is at the mercy of the government. It's unfortunate, but that's the process we need in this chaos. I think everyone can stipulate that a lesser penance be imposed upon the trivially abusive; nevertheless, it is out of the employers hands to a great degree since the employer did break the law, intentionally or not.

"That seems like a good prediction of what's going to happen next. But, when conservatives watch President Rodham do #3, they better blame themselves for #2."

Yes,yes,yes,it's all our fault for not holding our noses and voting for a Republican party every bit as pro-open border and pro-amnesty as those dastardly Democomucratistas.
The GOP has had 27 years in power and accomplised.......a few,temporary tax cuts and soem business deregulation.

and that's about it,these hacks couldn't even kill the national endowment for the arts!!!

If you cant kill the NEA while holding the WH and majorities in both houses,then anything serious is clearly beyond them.

They have blundered,bumbled and squandered every opportunity given them and frankly
I'm tired of being bitch slapped by these punks as their most significant acheivments have been dismantling the Reagan coalition and overturning Reagan's legacy.

Screw'em.

Re: m at May 17, 2007 6:01 PM

Here's the purely political explanation: The pro/con polls on this might be 50/50, but the pro side contains all the swing voters. The con side doesn't swing at all. They sit out sometimes, but they don't swing.

You may think they did, but Congress didn't ignore their pollsters on this. They never ever ignore the pollsters.

Welcome to the North American Union amigo, eh?

Jorge Busheron has pushed this since the 2000 election and now he's close to getting it. Our industy is leaving this country and being replaced by RETAIL - selling all those things made in China. That's what Americans do these days, work retail while the new servant class of Latinos, sweeps and cleans the restrooms, what a country!

RG, if your comment were not so pathetically true I would laugh! They also mow the grass and turn the hamburgers.

huh? how does this meet romney's requirement? A new Z visa is by defn NOT the way the other legal immigrants get here.

his point was there should be no short circuit. temporary visa or green card status is that.

I am a conservative, but not always a GOP voter: I cast my ballot for the person, not the party. If Zell Miller ran against McCain next year, I'd support "give 'em hell" Zell in a heartbeat.

I called DeWine's office at least once a week, along with my other reps, to tell them my position on the issue of the day. Called the RNC, the party leaders, and wrote to the hoity-toity elites, too. Fat lotta good it did me. I told DeWine, in particular, that if he voted for amnesty last year, I would not vote for him. Last November, I kept my word as did almost every Republican/conservative I know. I told my reps and the GOP today that I will not support or vote for the party next year if amnesty passes. I will keep that vow next year.

I've overlooked a lot in the past four years, but I'm done swallowing for the GOP. If they want my vote next year, they're going to have to do better than this:

The Gang of 14
A ban on oil drilling in ANWR and off our shores.
multiple conservative judges withdrawing their names from consideration because the RHINOS kept under-cutting them
Out-of-control spending and earmarks
Corruption
Never-ending scandals and screw-ups
And now, "comprehensive immigration reform."

No, this issue is my line in the sand: if the GOP loses next year, the party will only itself to blame. To quote Ronaldus Magnus, "I didn't leave the party; the party left me."

-----

Btw, Kyl's office told me this afternoon that anchor babies and dual citizenship were not in the bill and, so would stand as they are.

I don't think you can confuse presidential politics; which shows up every four years. With state and local politics, which district by district, and state by state, are the feeder arms into Congress.

The other thing one could notice? Senators, by and large don't make it into the White House. True, Truman did. FDR selected him when he made his 4th run. LBJ did. He got in when John Kennedy was murdered.

For that matter, Theodore Roosevelt cried when he was selected by McKinney, to be his veep, in his re-election. Only thing is, McKinney got shot, and died a month later; wasn't even in office 90 days, the second time around, when the mantle passed.

Gerald Ford (a member of the House), didn't make it on his own.

Yet men who get seated in Congress know one thing very well; and that is their own districts, where they need to get elected. And, for the 100 senators, that means knowing the in's and out's of a single state.

What kinds of lessons could you learn from this? One flavor wouldn't give you a store that sold much ice cream. Even if vanilla is your top seller. To draw in customers, you need variety.

And, when bills get compromised so that they pass? That's our system in action.

By the way, countries that don't grow, perish.

And, we're having trouble duplicating the fine white crop at the top. People no longer do what Joe Kennedy did. Every time he got home he impregnated his wife.

What are you going to do when people don't have children? Or only have one. Or two.

Comes the idea that immigration; which America has been doing in WAVES, has been happening since the beginning. Certainly during the 1800's, when coming here meant climbing onto a wooden boat; you'd see travelers today, running away from wooden boats. They've substituted other ways to get here. In a world where "being an American" is still valued. Yes. We can attract people.

And, there are loopholes in the laws, too. So, it's also tough getting in. Even though you might not think so.

My son's best friend just got married. He married a Japanese girl. And, she won't be coming to America till August. Because there's so much paperwork. But she will get here. As love crosses many borders. You'd be surprised how many women hunger to be brides to American men.

And, you'd probably be surprised to know that following WW2, a lot of American men brought home wives who "left paris" ... to live in Des Moines. Actually, all sorts of other places.

Perhaps, the biggest issue is LANGUAGE. Where I think more Americans complain, than not. Why is Spanish, for instance, a choice when you call local companies? No. I can't explain this. And, I think this is the major problem.

Coupled to the Saud's. Who are going to get their devils in here on special passes; because so far the White House occupant gives the Saud's special privileges.

Where FDR, the day following Pearl Harbor, went to congress, and in his speech pointed a finger at Japan and said "A DAY THAT WILL LIVE IN INFAMY."

Bush didn't do that at all. Nor do I believe wahabbism is a religion of peace, either. Actually, up ahead, for the flubs Bush made, it may come down to his presidency being one that LIVES IN INFAMY, ahead.

No. I do not know.

But I know tied to him is the fate of the right. The whole GOP? Well, there's always a minority party. And, the republicans have been good at it. Most of the 20th century they couldn't cast their own shadow. And, quoting Tom DeLay; where is book is dynamite terrific; he says the GOP as a minority just sits there and "gets along."

Maybe, you could learn something from the ways the current TWO PERCENTER's are running the shop?

While I think not everything is as smooth as you think behind the scenery. Mistakes have been made.

They just haven't been paid for.

Must be the habits we have of charging everything on plastic?

Captain Ed, you've been circling the drain for a while now in an ever more rapid downward spiral.

As I remove you from my favorites and leave I hear nothing but glug and gurgle behind me as your light goes out.

May all your remaining readers be Carole Herman.

Mica Vim Toot

Captain Ed, you've been circling the drain for a while now in an ever more rapid downward spiral.

As I remove you from my favorites and leave I hear nothing but glug and gurgle behind me as your light goes out.

May all your remaining readers be Carole Herman.

Mica Vim Toot

Captain Ed, you've been circling the drain for a while now in an ever more rapid downward spiral.

As I remove you from my favorites and leave I hear nothing but glug and gurgle behind me as your light goes out.

May all your remaining readers be Carole Herman.

Mica Vim Toot

Although I am a supporter of immigration reform that includes closing the borders in the future and amnesty for those who came here under different polices, I have a strong warning with this bill: As Democrats have been doing for years, this bill gets their foot in the door -- but in the future they will mine these immigrants for votes. Whether by accelerating citizenship or less legal methods, the Democrats see this group as easily manipulated and nothing more than a tool to gain more power.

MMalkin's poll data on the Amnasty bill is in, yes I can spell amnesty.
9534 votes on 'will you support a presidential cand, that supports the amnesty bill?

95% voted no, which includes 73% (including me) that voted 'hell no'. Too bad more democrats didn't vote, yes.

Some politicians are in deep doo doo. Has it dawned on the idiots that President Bush isn't running again (can't) and will be in Tx laughing at them. He tied the knot and they put it around their own necks. At least when the civil war starts we'll know who the enemy is, criminal Mexicans and stupid X congress critters and they're families. It will be a target rich enviroment. The entire populations of three far west states can be wiped out without harming over a dozen people not involved in the traitorous acts. What do they call the bomb that kills every living (breathing) thing but leaves the structures standing? Test run coming.

You're wrong on this, Captain Ed.

First of all, why is it that Democrats fight tooth and nail on even the smallest issue, but we lay down for even the largest? In the last Congress, with a 55 Seat majority, we couldn't even pass no-brainers like making the tax cuts permanent or drilling in ANWR because of Democrat fillibusters.

Now, however, with a much slimmer majority, they can apparently do whatever they want and we'll just lay down for it? Where is our fillibuster?

Purposefully importing tens of millions of hard leftsts from socialist countries into this nation and then making those people voters will just ensure that Conservatism dies and Democrats are the majority party for decades. Those numbers are huge, and all research shows that these are generally very, very liberal potential votes. We will be a European-like socialist country in one generation if this passes. We cannot allow it.

Also, we should certainly say that Enforcement must come first before amnesty. This isn't just like any other bill in Congress. We have an example of this very same thing happening in 1986 - promised enforcement but only got amnesty. And that further encouraged this new even bigger wave that we have now.

Are you really saying we should just fall for that again without trying to do something different? Do you think we're stupid?

What they want so badly is AMNESTY. And since they want it so badly, if we make them work for it by only granting it to them after they've proven enforcemenet, then we have a chance at actually having the border enforced. We MUST make them do the policially difficult thing FIRST, which is enforcement, before granting them the politically easy thing, which is amnesty.

Enforcement first is the only way. Just like in 1986, they will not enforce the borders, and we will only get amnesty.

By requiring that measurable enforcement come before any amnesty, we are much more likely to actually have enforcement occur.

For those regular readers here, you know I often disagree with Carol Herrman.

Her last post, however, makes a lot of sense to me in explaining why this Senate Bill has passed, and why GWB encouraged it against the wishes of the conservative base of the GOP.

The fact is that the restaurant, construction, agriculture, retail, domestic service and small-business manufacturing industries in this country have a desparate need for basic , blue collar labor at a reasonable cost. That is a very vital part of the economy which has in the past been supplied by recently-arrived immigrants.

The country's economic welfare is dependant on a plentiful supply of this kind of human power.

This type of legislation is a compromise solution (by definition, not acceptable to purists on either side of the political spectrum) which often breaks logjams in our history.

Please take note. The last time this kind of solution came down the pike, a very astute President was in office. I suspect his diaries reveal he understood precisely the plusses and minuses of the 1986 immigration act.

Nonetheless, he signed it.

It is simply US practical politics at work, weeping, wailing and gnashing of incisors, canines and molars to the contrary notwithstanding.

luthien,

Right the heck on comrade! My feelings exactly!

G.W. Bush was asked (a few days following the last election cycle) if he thought he would be capable of passing his immigration bill now that the Dems held power in both houses; Bush answered "YES", I do...

Bush has wanted this amnesty bill for years now and was only blocked by his own party from successfully pushing this bill through prior to this time. G.W. Bush is now on my "sold the American people down the river" list forever. Bush is a Nationalist more than anything else; Bush has some kind of deal with Mexico, some kind of relationship that really stinks like an old septic tank. With super highways that will destroy any possibility of having borders; with giving illegals a path to citizenship that only exists for them, while granting them a family bonus to bring in others. Take the 12 million or so that will be granted amnesty; add their families to the list and you will have an additional 100 million Mexicans living here within a decade. American culture will be swallowed by Mexican culture; 5-6-7 different languages will be written on our ballots; our schools will degenerate beyond comprehension; on and on...

If this bill passes, I will not support the Republican party with and funds; I will vote strictly for the individual that best represents my traditional American values; my Conservative ideology.

The time is ripe for an American hero to come out of the wood works and rescue this country from these power hungry politicians. I don't care what party that hero comes from; I'm praying for a true blue American patriot to come forward and rid this country of these power hungry whores; these traitors that call themselves servants of the people.

Having read the above comments by people otherwise very favorably disposed to the GOP, I'd say that Bush and McCain have lead the party to the brink of extinction. Only Q is, will enough Congressional Rs, not a perceptive lot, figure this out, or will they go over the edge with McCain and Bush?

Know what? I don't really care if they fling themselves over the edge. It will be ugly for a while, while the Hildebeasts roam, but in the long run it will be good to be rid of the Rinosaurs.

I am not in the hardline camp, but I think our administrative capacity to handle this is nonexistent. I think everyone in Congress should be compelled to spend a week with the border guards or in an INS office before voting, and I think the voters will not accept this absent a stronger effort to close our southern border.

This last week, a very typical suburb here in Texas had a vote on a city provision that would make apartment owners responsible for determining legal residence before renting. The media blasting it continuously, threats of lawsuits, declaration of racism, etc., etc.. The provision passed 68% to 32% even against the full court press

Both parties best take note; voters- by HUGE margins- want better enforcement first.

There is no reason we should have to grant legal status to 12 million illegals to get the border security we should have had in the first place.

The country's economic welfare is dependant on a plentiful supply of this kind of human power.

You do realize the US has already fought a war largely over this exact same argument, don't you?

wow, I'm in full agreement with Keemo, a guy I've never agreed with. Is it just me or is the gop imploding? I say seal the borders, bring the troops home from Iraq to do it, drill in Anwar, start a 3rd party that has some common sense.

Oh my. Can it get any worse? We can't even trust the Repubs to not be Democrats. Here's an idea: once all the Mexicans move up here, let's all illegally move to Mexico! Weather's nicer than most of the US, and whatever we can get for our houses would set us up pretty well there. Also the politicians may be cheaper to purchase. We'll just leave the US to the lefties and the rich elites, and turn Mexico into a decent place to live. :)

The bill is a disaster. That's why the supporters want immediate cloture -- the more the bill is examined by the public, the harder it will be to pass. BTW, note that Pelosi and Reid already are moving the terms. So, it turns out there is no deal on a bill. Instead, there is a deal to get cloture on a placeholder bill, upon which vote, if it can be won by Kennedy, Kyl, and Bush, the bill will start moving from "horrible" to "even worse."
"Oh, darn," the Senate GOP then will say. "The bill is getting worse!! Did we invoke cloture? Darn! I wish we hadn't done that. But it's too late now. Oh, darn."

Ed's argument that non-implementation is always possible isn't meaningful. Bush has had more than six years to enforce current law, but won't. He obviously won't enforce the sucker-bait contrived to decorate the amnesty bill.

Based on ample history, the current rhetoric, and the government's proven administrative incompetence - I have absolutely no evidence or confidence that there will be any enforcement.

Dereliction of Duty has been institutionalized. They'll just pull this same nonsense again in a few years, using the same old "the laws don't work" argument.

It's pathetic.

All Bush's fault!

Via Rantburg:

Read the leaked version of the bill. Its ASTOUNDING the concessions that are made.

It entitles them to financial aid for college, establishes a right to in state tuition, allows them to receive welfare and medicare/medicaid, and ll that without being required to go back.

There are even MORE goodies in the bill, including free federal aid for their defense if they are put on trial for lying on their immigration paperwork, and a mandate that the judges for immigration must have served as a lawyer FOR illegals for at least 3 years bofre they will consider him/her for a judge position.

Captain Ed is wrong about Romney. He is not for the immediate probationary legal status, the Z-Visa. Romney responded to this proposal saying, "I strongly oppose today's bill going through the Senate. It is the wrong approach. Any legislation that allows illegal immigrants to stay in the country indefinitely, as the new 'Z-Visa' does, is a form of amnesty. That is unfair to the millions of people who have applied to legally immigrate to the U.S."

Perhaps I missed it along the way....but can anyone explain to me why Pres. Bush has been such an advocate for lenient Immigration reform? Sorry for my being naive on the subject, but I would think his being a Texan would have him leaning more in Tancredo's direction.

I'm against this bill, I'm for enforcement...but at the same time, total enforcement, a concrete wall along the entire border will not stop this wave - it's like filling in a swiss cheese dike in Holland with wads of Double Bubble.

Now, finally...looking at the bright side of things....apparently Cap'n Ed's comments have brought me at least the one ray of hope and that is I don't have to view any more triple posts by Mica Vim Toot !

This Congress is starting to look like the mad hatter’s tea party and this could very well be another ploy like 1986. I like to look at things analytically. Here is some interesting data:

"ATLANTA - The number of people in the United States from ethnic or racial minorities has risen to more than 100 million, or around one third of the population, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report released Thursday.

The minorities figure stood at 100.7 million, up from 98.3 million a year earlier. Within that, the Hispanic population was the fastest growing at a rate of 3.4 percent between July 2005 and July 2006.

Hispanics were also the largest minority group, accounting for 44.3 million people on July 1, 2006, or 14.8 percent of the overall U.S. population which, according to census data released in October 2006, stood at more than 300 million."

If this turns out to be another 1986 deal, want to know what it could mean in mathematical terms for the Hispanic population? N = Log(2)/Log(1.034) = 20.73132 or in words the Hispanic population will double in about 20 years 8 months and 23 days at a 3.4% rate.

Now I have two problems with this and neither one has anything to do with ethnicity. One is the sheer numbers. There really is a limit to how many people you can stuff into a given geographical area before you start having real problems. If we allow this growth other groups will decide to join the party and within 20 years we may well be approaching 600 million folks. I don’t think that is sustainable. It doesn’t matter if they are all bloody Englishman, Chinese, Germans, Russians, Japanese, or whatever it isn’t sustainable. The other problem is the inability to assimilate a population that is growing this fast. Many of these new folks are not familiar with classical constitutional democratic republican government. Hell many more than half the indigenous folks aren’t. Worse, many will be going through our socialist propaganda mills called public schools. Bottom line – more demagogues as political leaders like the ones that are busy screwing up other places in the world.

This is not a racial or ethnic issue. It’s a lifeboat issue. If you put too many people in the lifeboat too quickly nobody lives! The solution is for other countries to fix their problems not for everyone to come here! This is not a big relatively empty country anymore.

"The key here is to (1) end citizenship for children born to illegals and (2) deny all public services to illegals, including schools, drivers licenses, and health care. And, when they come to the attention of the authorities for any reason, deport them immediately - as soon as illegal status is established, back they go."

Amen, brother. I get tired of people who say "but there's no way we can deport all 12 million illegals who are already here!"

My reply is, yes you can...one at a time.

"The fact is that the restaurant, construction, agriculture, retail, domestic service and small-business manufacturing industries in this country have a desparate need for basic , blue collar labor at a reasonable cost. That is a very vital part of the economy which has in the past been supplied by recently-arrived immigrants."

But who says it has to be? There are two perfectly good groups of legal citzens who can, and often should, fill those positions. They're called high school and college students. Use them.

(More ranting here.)

From history. The precursor to the republican party was the WHIGS. Starting in 1840 they fell into decline.

They were by the way the conservatives of their time.

Up in arms over Irish immigration. Because it brought in an influx of Catholics. And, up in arms, as well, against the German's, who were fleeing Europe. And, coming here in droves.

Lincoln, by the way, was OPEN to this immigration. And, seeing a need to feed the multitudes, opened the 23 "COW" colleges, where agriculture is taught as a subject. Many a farmer would have fights with their sons, returning from this education. But it worked.

And, as I said, the WHIGS becamea the party that welcomed in the Nativists. They were also the party of "compromise." Since Henry Clay never saw a political opportunity that woldn't feel powerful if he could ride it out.

By 1860 the WHIGS were finished.

No, I don't know the political considerations. Since the terrorists that got in, came with legitimate visas they got from the American Embassy in Riyadh. No need even to show up. Just have your "halp" deliver the papers. ANd, EXPRESS VISAS were given out. (Most of the 19 hijackers from 9/11, came in to this country that way.)

While some FBI agents in the field smelled a rat. Especially at flight schools. The information was never bumped up to the White House.

How many arabs are now in this country with citizenship? 7-million.

My guess is that both parties feel very threatened by the white guys on the right. So, this bill is to dampen this particular strain. At the ballot box.

And, EACH STATE has two senators. So for some sort of "compromise," at least in DC, this legislation passes muster.

Yes. People are angry.

But you can't change politics with anger.

It is also foolish to believe in campaign promises. This Bush grew up in a home, that when he watched his dad's lips moving, he had no idea if he was hearing the truth. Or not. The country, by the way, learned that "read my lips" was a campaign slogan. Quickly tossed out the window.

Now, how do you elect a patriotic guy who isn't gonna turn around and sell American assets to the Saudis?

The way Bush envisions border security, is the way he's seen to it all airports now inflict most Americans with X-ray machinery; while the Saud's get to walk to their own airplanes, unimpeded.

Is that the "border security plan?" Ain't gonna work if you think building a wall will keep the Mexicans, and others out. Because you can cut through these walls, the way you open a tin can.

Fifty states. One hundred senators. You'd think if the pressures were there it would be like a pressure cooker; and the people in Congress would notice. So far, hands in congress are finding each other.

Maybe, just like the War on Drugs, it means we have to build more prisons? Can't imagine that it's gonna be a field day ahead for thugs, ya know?

I don't think we're seen all the details yet, but as of now I'm not happy. Here's what I'd like to know.

1. What is the illegals status between passage of the bill and finally becoming a resident? I think they get sort of a provisional "legal" status. What citizen rights will they get between now and then? And will they need to pay that $5,000, back taxes, etc before they get that faux legal status? Will they get to vote?

2. Who is to decide when the enforcement part is officially up, running and working? Because I think that's the trigger for when they can get legal status. Since we haven't been able to get this done right since before the 1986 amnesty, who really thinks our borders will be sealed correctly? I'm just afraid, at some point someone will throw up their hands and say, we tried to enforce the border security and failed, but we promised to let them become citezens, and just do it anyway.

3. How exactly will the guest worker program be enforced? How will you get them back to their home country if they just don't go? Some argue that it's impossible now, how will that be possible later?

4. What is the benefit of this amnesty to the citizens and taxpayers of this country? I see the benefit to Mexico, they can unload their poorest and least educated peasants on the US. Why do we allow this? Why isn't there more pressure on Mexico to treat their citizens better and improve their economy?

I live in southern california and this area should be declared a disaster area. Full emergency rooms, closed emergency rooms, packed schools, extremely high drop out rates and traffic so bad you want to vomit. My first act is to change my status from (R) to independent and let all the Republican "powers" know it. Now I'm planning as early a retirement I can and getting the hell out of So Cal before the whole place becomes a slum.

I know this thing isn't done yet, hopefully some common sense will prevail before we begin the plunge to 3rd world status.

I disagree completely, Captain. We are getting neither what we want nor what we need. This legislation is nothing more than the GOP's political suicide note.

My wife is a legal immigrant from Africa. What fools we were - to have obeyed the law! What an outdated concept! We should have broken the law instead, and saved a lot of time and money.

This legislation will lead to full and total amnesty, regardless of the GOP attempts to spin otherwise.

Captain stated .............."my support is based on firm triggers based on border security and employment verification".

You mean triggers like in the Simpson-Mazzoli 1986 Illegal Alien Full Employment Act .........where there was supposed to be a system in place to account for those immigrants who's visas expired and accounting for their coming and leaving the USA. Thi was never enacted as discussed in the governments bi-partisan 9/11 report.

This immigration plan as reported in the press ......if enacted will ...........1) Grant immediate amnesty to illegal aliens here and those still to come who find a water bill reciept;

2) 12 million illegals illegals implies 132 million including family members ......many more than 132 million if you use the more precise figure of 20 million illegals here already;

3) Allow guest workers to erode wages of working American men and women across the board in all industries (especially when immigrants come in and undercut those already here);

4) Rewards lalessness and penalizes those seeking to emigrate to the USA who have followed our immigration laws; and will ............

5) Decimate the Republican Party.

This is the most detrimental legislation probably ever passed by a congress .....and ........will have a bankrupting effect on the American taxpayer and the American worker.

Now .....you may call it taking my ball and going home ........or .............however you'd like to portray it ........but .........I for one will be hard pressed to vote for a Republican ever again if this thing passes.

No, Captain Ed, you are completely wrong when you assert that any bill would have to resemble this one fundamentally. We could have a bill that would be strictly about enforcement, build that 2,000 mile wall, make internal enforcement much tougher, slow the pace of illegal immigration to a trickle, and then decide exactly what to do with those still here in subsequent legislation.

Instead, we are getting a "comprehensive" bill that claims to do both at once and where the enforcement end of things is promised later (except for triggers which are completely at the discretion of a president who has shown an utter lack of seriousness on enforcement). The idea that this is the best we can get, when it doesn't even live up to the original measly promise of 700 miles of border barriers we heard so much about previously is a joke. It just goes to show you how little faith you should place in those advocating the "comprehensive" approach when even their Mickey Mouse promises of enforcement are subject to future amendment.

Kate O'Beirne predicts this will amount to a $2.5 trillion dollar tax increase and she isn't including the cost of the children and grandchildren of Hispanic illegals (who continue to be poorly educated, low-income workers generation after generation and who rely far more extensively on government services while contributing far less in taxes than do white Americans.) What is worse, the Democrats are talking about the inadequacy of this bill when it comes to "family reunification." If they amend the law to allow a free flow of relatives at some point in the future, then millions of elderly people in Latin America who haven't paid a dime into our system may be eligible to draw from social security and other entitlements.

I'm through with the Banana Republicans. Everyone in the Senate and the House who votes for this bill is a traitor.

No, Captain Ed, you are completely wrong when you assert that any bill would have to resemble this one fundamentally. We could have a bill that would be strictly about enforcement, build that 2,000 mile wall, make internal enforcement much tougher, slow the pace of illegal immigration to a trickle, and then decide exactly what to do with those still here in subsequent legislation.

Instead, we are getting a "comprehensive" bill that claims to do both at once and where the enforcement end of things is promised later (except for triggers which are completely at the discretion of a president who has shown an utter lack of seriousness on enforcement). The idea that this is the best we can get, when it doesn't even live up to the original measly promise of 700 miles of border barriers we heard so much about previously is a joke. It just goes to show you how little faith you should place in those advocating the "comprehensive" approach when even their Mickey Mouse promises of enforcement are subject to future amendment.

Kate O'Beirne predicts this will amount to a $2.5 trillion dollar tax increase and she isn't including the cost of the children and grandchildren of Hispanic illegals (who continue to be poorly educated, low-income workers generation after generation and who rely far more extensively on government services while contributing far less in taxes than do white Americans.) What is worse, the Democrats are talking about the inadequacy of this bill when it comes to "family reunification." If they amend the law to allow a free flow of relatives at some point in the future, then millions of elderly people in Latin America who haven't paid a dime into our system may be eligible to draw from social security and other entitlements.

I'm through with the Banana Republicans. Everyone in the Senate and the House who votes for this bill is a traitor.

The key is, employers have to be forced to do more than look at one ID document from column B and one ID document from column C, and then sign their name to an I-9 form, indicating that the documents looked okay to them. The most effective new "fence," if it's ever built, is in the boss's office, or the manager's office, when employers are required to check forge-proof documents against a national database, just like they check to see if your MasterCard is approved, or not approved. Do people realize that about 40% of people here illegally today entered legally, but overstayed their visa? Most of them crossed the border at several thousand feet in the air.

Ed:
The reason that we don't believe Congress will ever attempt to enforce this legislation, is that they never have. Everyone who were the "Doubting Thomas's" in 1986 (Simpson-Mazzoli) are still waiting for the workplace enforcement we were assurred would occur following the amnesty they handed out at that time. Please tell me why I should believe that this group of cow-pies (with appologies to bovine excrement) will be any different than the last group.?
BTW, thanks for removing TypeKey.

Ed:
The reason that we don't believe Congress will ever attempt to enforce this legislation, is that they never have. Everyone who were the "Doubting Thomas's" in 1986 (Simpson-Mazzoli) are still waiting for the workplace enforcement we were assurred would occur following the amnesty they handed out at that time. Please tell me why I should believe that this group of cow-pies (with appologies to bovine excrement) will be any different than the last group.?
BTW, thanks for removing TypeKey.

Unfortunately, I think this latest amnesty bill draft is a fait accompli.

The question now is: How do we wrest control of Congress back from the Democrats, and keep the White House out of their hands? This country will almost assuredly end up in a civil war if we don't.

So to those of you who are pondering the possibility of sending another, ahem, "message", to the Congressional GOP, I hope you do the rest of us a favor and sit out this one in 2008!

The fact is that we cannot change things overnight. We may not like the spineless wonders that plague the GOP at this point in time, but to start up a third party and build it to a sufficient size and strength in order to take on the Dems and take over for the GOP would take at least a decade of constant activism on the part of, at a minimum, 50% of the Conservative voting base, working long hard hours to recruit new members and get the word out. We won't even talk about finding the funding for doing this.

No, it is far, far better to take what we have and change things accordingly. The Congressional GOP screwed up, and they know it. The newest members are well aware of the spending problem, and are working on getting the party back on track with its core principles and platform.

As hard as this is to consider and harder still to accept, we may have to let the "amnesty" bill go through and trust that the GOP is going to find the backbone to strengthen it.

But before 2008 we have to give the GOP back that which it needs to survive and find the strength to start doing the fighting we need it to do for all American Conservatives: We need to give them our support, 1000%. Only when they know they have the support of the base back will they find the courage to strike out again and get back on track where they were before they succumbed to the "Inside the Beltway" syndrome of good ole boys spending oodles of lovely green money to buy their reelections.

I think they've been wandering in the desert long enough. Let's stop this dang in-fighting, which, BTW, only helps the Dems in both the short and long runs, and start reorganizing and reenergizing ourselves, the base, and our elected representatives.

There's not much time left before the 2008 elections, so we'd better get started right now!

I think Heather MacDonald nailed it: "Its key feature is rather that illegal aliens, according to press reports, can immediately have their illegal status wiped away with a temporary-residency permit, available virtually upon demand. That’s it. The rest is noise."

This bill is NOT a fait accompli - and I am thrilled to see so many others who agree with me and Sen. John Cornyn, and many others, that this is something that America cannot afford to accept, laying down. We do have about 4 previous rounds to show us the facts. We have a lot of evidence that the GOP is unwilling to UNDO the DIM policies we rail ag ainst, they promise to undo when they promise everything they do to get our votes.

Some think WE created the RINO mess with the debilitated GOP in Congress, WE who refused to vote for "THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS" are the ones who moved this nation LEFT.

That disregards what all John McCain and the Gang of 14, the ones who rushed to vote for Dah Ahnold Man, because HE ALSO was "THE BEST WE COULD HOPE TO GET", thousands of individual situations of LOST GROUND, where politicians we voted for then bitchslapped the Conservatives while crawling up the backside of the Toady Chappaquiddick's when they got to Washington DC.

WE VOTED for people who passed strict laws for our border, and found out later - NO THANKS TO "THE FAIRNESS DOCTRINE" - that BUREAUCRATS WERE NOT ENFORCING OUR LAWS.

I hate politicians who smile at your face and stab you in the back.

We have a right for the people we vote for to EARN OUR TRUST.

And voting for someone who is going to help SWAMP OUR BOAT isn't a "WAY FORWARD" out of our present mess. Believe it or not, there are times when LISTING TO THE SIDE is the best you can get - NOT A SWAMPING!

I remember seeing a story on the History channel once about a ship in the Atlantic that was damaged, due to a really bad storm, and was laid totally over on the side, and a few men, or one man, stayed on board, tending to her, until help came, and the ship was with great difficulty, dragged back to port, because of such efforts.

Much would have been lost if that boat had been totally abandoned and was allowed to sink.

It took a heroic effort to save her - many wouldn't think it was worth it - especially the way so many insurance companies are set up, today - where it is better to write it off, like car theft - yeah, don't try to locate the stolen car, just let the insurance pay off, and let the chop shops have the cars --- yeah, right!

This nation didn't get built that way - PROMOTING car theft! Because of the "CONVENIENCE" of insurance.

If this nation is going to be saved and restored, we have to reverse a lot of damage like this illegal immigration baloney - we won't do it by continuing down the Liberal path of hte past - we need to bring that to a screeching halt, and yes, I think of the monumental effort of pumping out a sinking and listing ship - of the point when the crew realizes the ship isn't sinking lower in the water, but is actually beginning to rise back up again.

You cannot go forward by legitimizing crime.
You cannot go forward until you do Justice!

Anyway, the fact is that at some point, you have to realize that you are NEVER going to get a recovery unless you stop setting "for the best you can do", and put a full stop to the damaging actions, and start reversing and undoing the damage!

Posted by: Rose at May 18, 2007 1:02 AM

"You cannot go forward by legitimizing crime.
You cannot go forward until you do Justice!"

But you also cannot do a darn thing to change things, let alone do things or undo things, unless you have majority control of Congress.

Without that, everything else is an altruistic idealistic pipe dream.

It's time to get back to basics and build up from there.

"It's an argument that only supports no action whatsoever on illegal immigration, including border controls. In fact, it applies to everything Congress passes. "

It applies especially in areas where congress has done nearly exactly the same thing in the past, and completely failed to enact the enforcement part. (I.e. the 1986 amnesty).

Hence, a "trust (heh, but let's pretend) yet verify" scheme is what should be opted for - enforcement first. Anything else later.

"The guys digging under got in second. The ones cutting through made it through first. And, within six minutes time, the two that leapt up one wall, and over the barbed wire, to gall to the ground on the other sice, came in 3rd.

Pretty stupid to build fences, if they're no defense to trespassers."

Yes - fences are worthless - that's why a steady stream of highly motivated palestinian suicide bombers have kept coming in to Israel after the Israelis put up their security fence. Oh wait...

BTW, we get a lot of criticism for not punishing the DIM party for the things they do the GOP Politicians ENABLE, instead of punishing the GOP leadership.

How are we supposed to punish the DIMS for what the GOP leadership allows them to do?

We don't VOTE for them - how can we effectively hurt them by CONTINUING to withhold our votes from them.

That would be like boycotting a business you never patronized anyway - they could never feel it!

All we can do is make an impact on the GOP leadership that said one thing to our face, and did the opposite, when "out of sight" in Washington, dealing with DIMS face to face.

And when they lie to us about what they intend to do, to get our vote, and don't honor that pledge, the only thing we can do about it is withhold our trust from them in the future.

At THAT point, voting for THEM would be IDENTICAL to voting for DIMS - because they have made the DIM policies POSSIBLE - contrary to their promises to us.

If we had a way to withhold our donations from the DIM party - we would. Since we never gave them any, how can we WITHHOLD from them WHAT WE NEVER GAVE THEM.

Meanwhile, we are supporting the individuals who are honoring their voters.

If their career is suffering, I assure you, WE are doing the best we can!

Maybe if their constituents are not supporting them because THEY are angry at the DIMS, then that GOP politician isn't getting a vociferous enough protest out to his base.

I don't know what to tell you guys when YOU blame US for not voting for RINOS in 2006.

It sure isn't as if we didn't send plenty of warning ahead of time!

Now, we need the GOP to BELIEVE us!

When WE send the message, and they turn around and LIE to the MSM about why they are doing so poorly, after WE were explicitly CLEAR, do you think WE think THEY are Conservatives?

THOSE guys have made up their mind to do whatever they have to, to move this nation LEFT!

Ed:
The reason that we don't believe Congress will ever attempt to enforce this legislation, is that they never have. Everyone who were the "Doubting Thomas's" in 1986 (Simpson-Mazzoli) are still waiting for the workplace enforcement we were assurred would occur following the amnesty they handed out at that time. Please tell me why I should believe that this group of cow-pies (with appologies to bovine excrement) will be any different than the last group.?
BTW, thanks for removing TypeKey.

Posted by: Drew at May 17, 2007 11:54 PM

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

THIS JUST NAILS IT!

MEGA DITTOS and AMEN!

First you don't need a fence or to deport them
what you need to do is
1. stop the anchor babies
2. fine companies that hire them, double the fine each time you catch one illegal working there e.g. 100k then 200k then 400k
3. when an illegal is caught take DNA and make such that they can never become legal citizens.
4. no benefits any way shape or other to them.

and if you believe they are taking jobs americans dont want I have a bridge for you.

Regan had the same problem with immigration enforcement as Bush has now. Both had to face a Democrate Majority Senate and Congress and the Democrates will not enforce immigration laws because they want the votes.

Nixon had a similar problem. The Democrates promised to fund the South Vietnamise if we sent our troops home. After our troops left Vietnam, the Democrate Majority refused to fund the South and millions of people were killed by the Communist North because the South had no financing of weapons and supplies that we promised to give to them.

The point of this comment is that many Republicans and Independants voted in the Democrates as a Majority. Be careful for what you wish for is now an understatement.

The Republicans aren't the problem to illegal alien enforcement because the Democrates will not enforce the law since they want the illegals to vote for them. If the Democrates want convicted felons to vote, why wouldn't they want illegal aliens to vote? Remember, the Democrates are now in power.

Therefore, you can't blame the Republicans who now have less power to do what you want done on any issue. President Bush has limited power now.

Those who bought the ideas that Bush is to blame or the Republicans are spineless are the ones who voted in the Democrates. Will these same people vote in a Democrate for President?

If that happens, the Republicans will have zero power and the Democrates, all the power. However, no one can then complain that the Republicans are doing a bad job since they will have no power to do any job either good or bad.

First, my support is based on firm triggers based on border security and employment verification -

Why would you believe them now? They are the exact same platitudes and lies they told us last time.

In 20 years we'll be giving another 20 million amnesty.

I think Ed is brave for saying what he believes in the face of the hardliners. Why believe them now? Why ever? If there was no attempt at good faith here it would be easier to just tell the loud people what they wanted to hear in order to shut them up. But apparently there has been some attempt made to actually accomplish something. Hopefully the hardliners will not make it impossible to pass. If they do, and there is no movement on border security...they can go look in a mirror and blame that guy.

You righteous bastards. Where the hell has your side been when they had control of the power, real power for 6 years? Sitting on their hands , doing nothing and now the Democrats crank out a bill you just sit back and complain. You spineless weasels. Vacumesque policy stays in a vacuum. Reagan utopianists, WHO by the WAY, voted in droves for W. That's what you all hate to admit about your King, his views are the ones you can't stomach, and YOU elected his ass. Bravo to ED.Steady on Capt.

There never has been any good faith effort to enforce our border from out current crop of politicians. Why on earth should we believe a word of what these folks are trying to impose upon us? The lack of principle, character, and backbone in our political class is truly appalling. Only a fool would believe that this current proposal will fix anything. Our disingenuous politicians just want this inconvenient issue to go away. But I guess we get the government we deserve. How depressing.

fly-man,

This is not a Democrat bill dip stick; this is the bill Bush has been trying to sell us for the past (6) years. Have you had your head stuck in a hole for the past several years, or are you just this stupid?

That's precisely my point. It is a Democratic bill by DEFAULT because the president's own party didn't have the spine to over ride him. Why don't the conservatives go get their own party if things are just that unreasonable? You guys remind me of Plankton on Sponge Bob, actually more like Pinky and the Brain. Grandiose ideas and master plans to rule it all but in the end ineptitude rules instead.

If the Presidents own party didn't have the spine to over ride him, then why didn't the Presidents bill pass while Republicans held power?

Conservatives derailed the Presidents plan to have Dubai control our ports; Conservatives derailed the Presidents plans to put Harriet Meyers on the SC... Conservatives are the only hope this nation has to derail this bullshit amnesty plan.

What really is your stake in this fly-man?

Ed, you are balls on!!! Something had to be done and now that it appeart it will be the hard liners (Hannity & Co.) are screaming like stuck pigs. NO ONE WAS GOING HOME! Face it folks. There's a lot here that's good so....let's see.

My stake is that the notion that the conservatives have to have the last and final say on everything yet find themselves constantly ineffective articulators and at best horrible sales people for their ideas. If the Dubai ports deal and Ms. Meires' un-appointment are the highlights of Conservative influence i rest my case. i understand the idea of staying as far to one side as you can keeps the middle from going the other way but purely insisting on principle that there is no other way to solve an issue just sets one up for being a sore, very sore loser. Again, why don't the conservatives get their own party? Then we can see all these great ideas come to life, instead of being a facade.

How the terms of the illegal immigration debate never change:

Ted Kennedy on Immigration [Mark Krikorian]
1965: “The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society. It will not relax the standards of admission. It will not cause American workers to lose their jobs.”

1986: “This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens. We will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this.”

2007: “Now it is time for action. 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system.”

Posted at The Corner. Note, John McCain believes the exact same thing.

We do not need “immigration reform.” The only thing “broken” with the system is the lack of will to enforce the law. The federal government has not and will not act in good faith on this issue until the political class in Washington is shaken up. Let your representative know you won’t fall for the continued lies of Uncle Teddy and his merry band of amnesty granting friends.

Does history have any meaning to you Bill?

Ed, you are balls on!!! Something had to be done and now that it appeart it will be the hard liners (Hannity & Co.) are screaming like stuck pigs. NO ONE WAS GOING HOME! Face it folks. There's a lot here that's good so....let's see.

I agree, CAPT, this Bill isn't nearly as bad as the hysterics make it out to be.

Politics is the art of the possible. This is what's possible. There's no possibility of millions of people being deported or driven across the border.

Ed, you are balls on!!! Something had to be done and now that it appeart it will be the hard liners (Hannity & Co.) are screaming like stuck pigs. NO ONE WAS GOING HOME! Face it folks. There's a lot here that's good so....let's see.

Government of the corporation, by the corporation, and for the corporation. Econo-socialist-capitalism is the brave new world of America's wealthy elite.

Good bye, Republic. We never knew you.

If 12 million legal citizens owed the IRS 100K a piece, there would not be a weak excuse about rounding them up! This is the most pathetic excuse I have heard in my life! America get ready to keep your first born home, because we will need a third income under our roof soon, to make ends meet. Both side of this pathetic isle just took a dump on the American way of life. Today I am ashamed to have voted to the right for the last 30 years. The right wants cheap labor, and the left wants cheap votes. Absolutely Pathetic. Lastly I am sick of the images of field workers when the news brain washes on this subject, try showing images of MS13 during the violin sound track. Sickening.

If 12 million legal citizens owed the IRS 100K a piece, there would not be a weak excuse about rounding them up! This is the most pathetic excuse I have heard in my life! America get ready to keep your first born home, because we will need a third income under our roof soon, to make ends meet. Both side of this pathetic isle just took a dump on the American way of life. Today I am ashamed to have voted to the right for the last 30 years. The right wants cheap labor, and the left wants cheap votes. Absolutely Pathetic. Lastly I am sick of the images of field workers when the news brain washes on this subject, try showing images of MS13 during the violin sound track. Sickening.

fly-man,

You apparently are of the belief that the anger on display regarding this amnesty bill is a Conservative issue only; very naive perception, based on emotions rather than facts...

Many members of my family are Democrats married to the union they have belonged to for their entire careers (heating & air) in Northern California. These folks are fighting mad over this for very obvious reasons. Liberals favor this amnesty plan; some Republicans favor this amnesty plan simply because they are hoping for some form of a Bush victory leading up to the 08 election cycle. I'm looking at this from a perspective of the future of my country. We must have borders; we must protect our borders; we are a nation of laws; we must enforce these laws; we are a nation with a rich history of "legal immigrants"......

I can only hope that all of you will take an honest look at the big picture here; a look into the future; a look at our recent past (just go back 40-50 years). Our politicians on both sides of the isle are selling out the very foundation of our country, for votes... This must stop!

There's no possibility of millions of people being deported or driven across the border.

This is a strawman. If we enforced current law, taxed and regulated remittances to Mexico and sealed the border so people couldn't cross it at will, millions of illegal immigrants would deport themselves.

Anger on display here simply mirrors the same as The NRO, RedState, did you want me to go on? Are those bastions of liberal leanings towards immigration reform? Anger from the middle? You mean like that old skit on SNL when John Lovitz imitates Michael Dukakis at he debates?That kinda outrage?My main tic with Conservatives is the" way it ought to be" meme as a sales pitch to a futile situation. Just wait and blame the other guys when they do exactly what you know they were going to do and then NOT blame yourself for not executing a strategy. It is shameful across the board but to sell people a bill of goods and then waste, time, power and resources under the guise of reform is heresy.

"Perhaps I missed it along the way....but can anyone explain to me why Pres. Bush has been such an advocate for lenient Immigration reform? "

Because he's deeply fond of his mexican maid, who explained all this to him.

No,I'm not joking,Georgie-porgie said this in an interview.

Remember proposition 187 in California. We voted that proposition in by a huge margin, only to have our politicians and judges throw the obvious will of the people under the bus.

Here is an example of "more of the same" in a different state.

http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/89868

Government by the people, for the people.... Remember when that concept was created? Does it appear that any remains of that concept still exist in this era?

"Perhaps I missed it along the way....but can anyone explain to me why Pres. Bush has been such an advocate for lenient Immigration reform? "

Because he's deeply fond of his mexican maid, who explained all this to him.

No,I'm not joking,Georgie-porgie said this in an interview.

I don't think it will pass the house, I (praying) am hoping the blue dog Dems who were voted in on stopping illegals will have to toe the line with Repubs because hey they come back up for re-election in 2008, a girl can hope can't she?

What got us in the minority in the first place?

One word: Bush. Two lost wars.

This massive amnesty simply is the shot in the head administered to a dying elephant in pain.

I'm with you, Ed.

I have to laugh (sadly, but still laugh) that people are still willing to surrender to the Democrats, considering that the "make 'em pay" crowd is who's the angriest right now. Of course, as with November '06, I sure won't be laughing when they end up electing Hillobama.

/ignoring most of the other comments; looks like the DU

I appreciate Ed's points that mass deportation isn't practical and "self-deportation" is a magic-bullet solution that won't have a realistic impact.

However I can't see past one conundrum - any massive immigration reform/amnesty (not just this one) will kill the GOP - no matter how practically-grounded and realistic it may purport to be.

As noted by others here, enfranchising 12-20 million new voters from left-leaning socialist countries, where politics is about entitlements and cronyism, will be political suicide for limited government conservatives.

Say what you will about winning hearts and minds among the new voters - I fear the lure of bread and circuses will outweigh the most principled and noble efforts the Right might make to win them over.

The Democrats have "branded" themselves as the party of entitlements, and Republicans can't compete with them in that arena even if they were so inclined.

If anyone sees a clear way through that thicket, please shine a light my way.

I appreciate Ed's points that mass deportation isn't practical and "self-deportation" is a magic-bullet solution that won't have a realistic impact.

However I can't see past one conundrum - any massive immigration reform/amnesty (not just this one) will kill the GOP - no matter how practically-grounded and realistic it may purport to be.

As noted by others here, enfranchising 12-20 million new voters from left-leaning socialist countries, where politics is about entitlements and cronyism, will be political suicide for limited government conservatives.

Say what you will about winning hearts and minds among the new voters - I fear the lure of bread and circuses will outweigh the most principled and noble efforts the Right might make to win them over.

The Democrats have "branded" themselves as the party of entitlements, and Republicans can't compete with them in that arena even if they were so inclined.

If anyone sees a clear way through that thicket, please shine a light my way.

Ok, Ed, here is a question for you and all the "realists" who understand that politics is about compromise.

I believe that Thomas Sowell is one of the most wise people alive today. He once wrote about "sticking to your convictions" while actually acting in a manner that is in opposition to your stated convictions. His example at the time was about pro-life people not voting for Bob Dole for President because he was not "pro-life enough". His point was, which I cannot disagree with in principle, that not voting for Dole, who was more pro-life than Clinton, might actually elect Clinton and produce "more abortions" in complete opposition to their stated ideals.

So here is the question of which I certainly do not claim to have an answer. WHEN should Conservatives throw the bums out? Never? As long as they are a molecule to the right of the Dems they are better? Better a RINO like Chaffe or Snowe than a Democrat, no matter what? The Republicans could pass complete Socialism but I should vote for them as long as the Dems remain any amount to their left?

As an aside, I thought that I heard Karl Rove say on Sean Hannity's radio show that we deport 6 million people every year. This was of course preceded or followed with "we can't deport 12 million people"?!!! Hmmmm, 6 million a year times 2 years equals......12 million deported illegals! Maybe I misunderstood him.

I really do not wish to increase the amount of illegal immigration in this country simply to vent my spleen, but doing nothing doesn't make sense either.

"/ignoring most of the other comments; looks like the DU"

I would guess that the DU are pretty pleased with the compromise. Much like you.