BUSH the DECIDER says the "amnesty illegal immigration bill" WILL Pass!!!!

[Robson]

The "decider in chief" has spoken. The people of the USA will get another amnesty bill for illegal immigrants whether they want it or not. If that isn't enough to make most Democrats very suspicious of this bill I don't know what is.

Reagan pulled one over on us with all the same promises, and now Bush is going to pull the same stunt and it will result in more failed enforcement, more cuts in wages for American citizens, higher taxes, and most of all another larger wave of illegal immigrants. Those who gain will be Bush's base of "haves". Those who lose will be the Democratic base of "have nots". So why does Ted Kennedy support it?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19149972

BUSH VOWS IMMIGRATION BILL WILL BE SIGNED:

SNIPPED:

At a news conference with Parvanov, Bush’s comments on immigration reflected his determination to pass a bill to give millions of unlawful immigrants a path to citizenship. It is a top priority for the remainder of his presidency, but a fragile bipartisan compromise on the issue has unraveled.

“Now, it’s going to require leadership from the Democrat leaders in the Senate, and it’s going to require me staying engaged and working with Republicans who want a bill,” Bush said.

SNIPPED:

[Robbien]

1. Dems aren't too excited to fight for it

GOPers are very excited to fight against it.

Good luck with that georgie.

[unlawflcombatnt]

29. A lot of Dems hate it

Senator Claire McCaskill was on Lou Dobbs expressing her opposition to it. She stated that the underlying problem regarding illegal immigration was lack of prosecution of employers. She's also one of the Dems who voted against the cloture motion on the Senate's Amnesty bill. Best guess is that she'll vote against it, and vote against cloture again.

[LSK]

2. so can he make a signing statement when theres no bill to sign???

Hes heading into new territory with that...

[Richardo]

3. If he wants help from the other side, stop calling them the 'Democrat' leaders

Arrogant prick.

[Robson]

6. That's what the article said - you need to learn to read

Once again click on the link and that "Democrat leaders" is a quote from the news article. You need to learn to read before reacting, but I'm not going to call you an arrogant prick.

[Richardo]

7. My comment was addressed to Bush, not you.

I edited to clarify.

Sorry for the confusion.

[Robson]

10. Accepted

Apology accepted....and I agree that it is Bush that is the prick, and not those many Democrats that oppose this bill. Maybe I was confused who you were referring to as an "AP". I thought you were referring to me for the use of "Democrat leaders" when it was Bush quoted by the MSNBC reporter that wrote the article. (Edited to clarify)

[RogueSpirit]

4. it has occoured to me...

That this immigration issue could decidedly be the way to beat the conservatives in '08.

Now regardless of your position on the matter, one has to ask, what is more important right now, gaining control back so liberal policies can be put into place, or to pass a bill that will allow amnesty to foreign nationals trying to come here make a better life for themselves. Of all the issues I have heard about since I really started paying attention, this issue seems to be the ONE issue causing conservatives to eat their own.

Now face it, whatever is passed it will take a while to implement and can be stalled. if the dems make border security a core issue in '08, you will have DROVES of moderate conservatives and swing voters flocking to support the policy.

I mean face it, according to what we are being told, if we had secure borders, 9/11 would have never happned, right? It honestly seems like this issue would be a more effective presentation of a valid WoT tactic than the assinine excuses we were given for going into Iraq.

[Robson]

11. Kerry could have won

John Kerry could have won in 2006 had he merely taken the common sense position that he, unlike George Bush, will enforce our borders and our current immigration law.

Kerry would have won in a landslide. I remember the question on one of the last debates where he hedged on the issue, and the common sense approach that most Americans want was lost. This isn't a Democrat or Republican issue, this is common sense, protect and defend our borders issue.

[unlawflcombatnt]

30. Yes Indeed

Had Kerry taken a position of enforcing our borders and enforcing current immigration law he would have won, even with Republican manipulation of the voting process in Ohio.

[Robson]

38. The numbers would have overwhelmed the fraudsters

Yes the numbers of votes for Kerry would have exceeded the ability of the fraudsters in a Ohio and Florida to swing the election. If only Kerry would have had some common sense and compassion for Americans on this issue.

[annabanana]

35. When you have a chance to do a little digging:

Here's some background reading for you
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1101804

[treestar]

15. 911 would have happened regardless of immigration laws

Using immigration laws to prevent 911s is like prescribing aspirin for brain tumors. The CIA should have caught them.

The immigration laws are just regulatory in nature.

The RW does contradict itself on this. By their free market theories, we should be able to hire whoever we want to hire - nobody should be illegal if they have a willing employer here, per rightie doctrine. They hem and haw when you press them on it and refuse to explain why this one issue should be not subjected to the free market.

[Robson]

17. American workers deserve a free market unencumbered by illegal workers

The RW does contradict itself on this. By their free market theories, we should be able to hire whoever we want to hire - nobody should be illegal if they have a willing employer here, per rightie doctrine. They hem and haw when you press them on it and refuse to explain why this one issue should be not subjected to the free market.

TS....That's the fallacy in all this. The corporations want a legitimate/legal free market when it is to their benefit, but they oppose a legitimate/legal free market when it is not to their benefit. As an example:

They want government to restrict unauthorized and counterfeit Rolex watches and CDs, while they want consumers restricted from buying their meds from Canada. They want the right to outsource at will to China, while they oppose giving American workers their right to a free market without competition from illegal workers.

[treestar]

24. Why do they "deserve" this

we are stuck competing with the rest of the world, period.

The illegals are taking the lowest paying jobs, too.

Get over yourself. You're American, but that doesn't make you more valuable. You don't "deserve" a suspension of the free market just for being born in America.

[Robson]

25. Wrong question was asked

In America we should have the expectations and the right not to have compete with illegal immigrants in our own country. The question should be twofold. What right do outsiders have to invite themselves to our jobs in our towns and states? What right does business have to hire illegal workers?

While we may not be able to stop corporations from moving jobs to Mexico, we should be able to stop corporations from illegally importing illegal workers.

[treestar]

27. We have the option of letting them import the workers they need

So that the rest of us will benefit by getting the higher level jobs.

As for trying not to compete within our country, we're out of luck. It's the 20th century. We can't decree that the economy take place only within this country and for the benefit of this country only.

But to the extent the free market works, we have little or nothing to worry about. We are better off than all these people we pretend we deserve not to have to compete with, and can get better jobs than they. It's like being a manger of a factory and whining that anyone gets the underling jobs. Like they should be kept empty lest we need them. Yet without them, our manager job is not needed.

Reality is not optional, and furthermore, it's not so bad, either.

[Robson]

28. So should the corporatists have their way with us?

As I read your post I'm utterly dumbfounded that a Democrat would believe we Americans should cave-in to the rich corporatist mongers (they called them robber barrons a 100 years ago), and these elitists should now have carte blanche ability to hire workers who will accept the lowest wages, even if said workers don't belong in our country.

Geez...sorry I don't even have a reply to that.

[unlawflcombatnt]

31. Americans deserve an adherence to the free market

And the free market for American labor is confined to that of legal American workers, which does NOT include illegal immigrant workers.

Furthermore, Corporate America has no right to expect access to all of the workers of the world when it wants to sell its goods on the American market. The spending power of the American market is created by the income of American workers. Without the American consumer market, American business couldn't survive. There's no justification for them bypassing the free market price for American labor, while expecting to receive the free market price for goods in the American market. It can't work both ways.

[pampango]

33. Would you support the presence of the 12 million illegal immigrants

if they had been admitted legally under a more generous immigration law? They would then be part of the "legal" American workforce, though there large numbers would represent an increase in the supply of labor and downward pressure on wages.
Are you opposed to the presence of the 12 million immigrants or to their legal status? If the latter, legalizing them would make them part of the legal American workforce.

Or is this a "rule of law" issue?

[Robson]

36. If they had been here legally...here's the issue.

We have 12-30 million illegal immigrants in this country that don't belong here. Actually I believe the true number to be on the very high side as the incentive of those in the Bush administration who are responsible for these estimates is to under swag the number (and it's just a swag). No one can ever prove the amount based upon current lack of enforcement. But they want us to believe there are less here rather than more.....wouldn't you agree?

OK had Congress and a President written and passed a law and approving 12 million or 30 million legal unskilled Mexican immigrants into our country I would accept it. But you know, and I know, they'd never have the political guts to put their name on such a vote. It would never happen. So they wink and allow them to come in the back door to help the institutions (business, churches, some self serving unions) and act as if it isn't happening.

They ( Congress and Presidents) have pulled the wool over our eyes, and that they did approve, and we should be outraged.

[Jim Sagle]

39. Fuck off and die, globalist filth.

[RogueSpirit]

23. oh I agree

I just wonder, in a comparison to chess, with issues as pieces, what is border security to us, what is it to them?

I am under the impression that their base sees border security as like a queen. If it's anything less to us, then we should take it and run with it. This could very well be a tipping point issue for a LOT of moderates.

[entanglement]

5. His rabid freeper "base" is frothing, raving mad about this

Go "over there" and you'll see for yourself :evilgrin:

[RogueSpirit]

9. that's exactly my point

They are already eating their own, so this is an issue we need to get behind and push for. We all know the borders will never be fully secure, and whether it ever gets there or not is not the point. Developing the appearance and really pressing home that this is the best way to be strong on homeland defense would be to take this issue under wing and start promoting secure borders.

[catmandu57]

14. The chimpenfurher* doesn't care about the foaming mouth base

Just the base with the loot, the ones who demand cheap cheap cheap labor, let's watch and see how this fight comes out.

[RogueSpirit]

16. exactly, and nature abhors a vaccuum

they need someone to take up their banner. if bush won't do it then someone on the left should, just to get the base to see who really cares.

[hughee99]

13. Maybe * feels that his approval ratings are too high...

He's found a way to piss off even his 30% of hardcore supporters...

[EFerrari]

8. THE MEXICANS ARE COMING!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. Eeek!! Hide your bedpans and lettuce!! They're coming to steal your jobs!!

[conspirator]

26. they took o'jobs... nt

[spanone]

12. He then called for all Congresspersons to be wiretapped and photographed in compromising positions.

:sarcasm:

[Robson]

18. That's not sarcasm, that's true

He will discuss it with each and every one.

[OwnedByFerrets]

19. Behind closed doors......

the congress critters are being told " you either pass my bill or else we will begin releasing all those secrets of yours that we have been recording for all these years." Or, "pass my bill or there will be another unsolved rash of anthrax poisonings."
:puke:

[Robson]

21. Bush worries the heck out of me, and to see Ted Kennedy buddying up worries me even more

After 6 years of Bush's corrupt pro-corporate incompetence, it is beyond the realm of my comprehension how we can see Democrats supporting something that Bush obvious wants and demands. It's so obvious to most of America what this bill is about and whom will benefit, yet there are some Democrats that think it will be good for the country.

By this time there should be an unwritten law in Democratic Party philosophy that says if Bush strongly wants something, then it is in the Democratic Party's interest and more importantly in America's interest to vote against it.

:banghead:

[zonmoy]

20. what exactly is he up too

is he planning to use the mexicans to force wages down to slavery levels or what.

[Disturbed]

32. Most Dems want this because they think that the Illegal

Immigrants will mostly vote for Dems once become citizens. Busholini wants this because it boosts the Corp. profits. Most Rethugs don't want this because they want to stay in office. They think that llegal Immigrants will mostly vote for Dems. Plus keeping them Illegal will still benefit Corps.

[pampango]

34. I am not sure that most Democrats want this, though most

Democratic politician probably do - precisely for the reason that they expect them to largely vote Democratic when they become citizens.

[Star80]

37. We Are Missing The Bigger Picture...

This is a very convenient way for Senor Decideriere to fill the ranks of the military for his perpetual war. We don't have to support, feed, house, or clothe them, because Halliburton already has the contract. And in Monkeynuts' eyes, if they all get killed over there, then he wont have to kill them over here...

I love DU.

But we spend way too much time focusing on micromanaging issues (which is just what RoveCo wants), instead of the real reasons for this bill and why Mr Commander said today that 'it _will_ happen.'

[KamaAina]

40. Oh joy. From what I'm hearing, it'll be worse than the one that died.

All the "compromises" I read earlier were to placate reluctant repukes. Wouldn't that push some Dems off the fence and against it? or are they just going to roll over and make starfish paws, like they did on the Iraq timetable?