Now the Real Fun Starts

[Hap]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/index.html

[jhookt]

too bad we'll never see the President on stand doing his version of the Alberto Gonzalez dance.

[Ripsnort]

Good for them. The political posturing by the Dem's is definately going to hurt them in 08'.  Instead of promising to do what they said in '06, they are focusing on those right of the isle and going into smear mode(or rather "have been in smear mode).   The bottom line is it hurts us all.

[ForrestS]

This isent just bunch of cusing its acctually kinda good.

GWB rap

[AKIron]

I wouldn't credit Bush with attempting to push through an illegal immigrant amnesty bill most Americans are adamantly against knowing that most senate/house Democrats would support it to their political detriment but I think he is smart enough to listen to smarter advisors. He won't be up for reelection afterall.

[bj229r]

I hope Sen. Voinovich isnt typical of our 100--I was listening to this yesterday:

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56414

The key sticking point in the conversation was Hannity's question as to whether the senator had done a cost analysis on the bill. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think-tank, estimates the bill would cost the American taxpayers $2.5 trillion.

Voinovich said he didn't believe the cost would be that high because a third of those eligible for a path to citizenship would never take it.

"How do you know that?" Hannity asked. "Where does that figure come from?"

Voinovich did not provide any supporting evidence for his contention and admitted he had read neither the bill itself or the Heritage Foundation analysis.

The senator complained that some of his constituents have attempted to "intimidate" him by saying they would oppose his re-election if he voted for the bill.

"You do not intimidate George Voinovich," he said. "During my 40 years in this business, I have always looked at the pros and cons of each piece of legislation and made a determination. If people don't like my decision, they can express their will during the next election."

When Hannity began making the case against the "amnesty" bill, Voinovich interrupted, asking: "Are you happy with the current legislation? Our current laws stink!"

"No one is enforcing those laws, senator," said Hannity. "That's the problem. It's been five and half years since 9/11, and the border is still not secure."

When Hannity returned to the issue of cost analysis, Voinovich cut the conversation short.

"I don't really think there is any point talking to you further," said Voinovich. "You are just looking for someone to agree with you. I'm disappointed in you."

The conversation began with a question from Hannity about whether the senator supported the Fairness Doctrine, currently a hot topic among Voinovich's colleagues.

"Fairness Doctrine – I'm all for it, whatever it is," he said. "I think everyone should be open to show the other side. That's what you do every night on Fox. That's great!"

When Hannity reminded Voinovich that the Fairness Doctrine would establish government regulatory bureaucracies to enforce this balance, Voinovich quickly retreated.

Voinovich also asserted efforts in the Senate earlier in the day were successful at amending the immigration bill to require illegal aliens to return to their nation of origin before getting on a path for a green card. When Hannity pointed out the measure failed in a 53-45 vote, Voinovich seemed stunned.

"He doesn't even know what the Fairness Doctrine is," exclaimed Hannity. "He doesn't even know the outcome of a vote in the Senate today. And he gets mad at me when I try to explain it to him!" .

[Hap]

Well, I was thinking this over and the immigration bill was a canny move by Bush.

Give away citizenship in return for votes.  Sort of like the pre-civil was problems in the house of representatives but without the Mason-Dixon line.

Rip, as far as the Dems smearing, you're right.  They've got plenty of company on the right side of the aisle too.  Yes, we all lose also.  It would be nice so see someone say, phoeey.  We quit.  We won't do it that way any more.  But the short term gains are too great, and the folks involved are bowled over by power and money.

The best politicians that money can buy.

It is dismal.  And in the face of contrary evidence, I still hope for some smidgen of truth telling.

Oh, there's a real good speech written by Ted Sorensen, JFK's speechwriter, I just read.  I don't agree with all that he said.  But the tone and subject matter at least is worthwhile.  I like the straight up front approach.  I don't know which is more ridiculous, thinking Viet Nam was in our national interest or the mess in the Middle East.

The best thing that could be done is to devise some Yankee know how to drastically reduce our need for what they have.

What could be better?  

You can find it on Real Clear Politics.

[bj229r]

Give away citizenship in return for votes. Sort of like the pre-civil was problems in the house of representatives but without the Mason-Dixon line.

Only problem with that, which Gop types just can't comprehend, is WHY would dirt poor Mexicans EVER vote Republican? They are gonna vote for the party offering them FREE stuff. Even if they come over here with intact 'family values', those more often than not go out the window as they are awarded with welfare, etc for having babies out of wedlock

[lazs2]

It is simple proof that we don't even need the bums.

Why have an immigration bill at all?  All we have to do is enforce the current laws.. we haven't done that for 30 years so what would this bill have done?  why is it so important now and hasn't been for 30 years?  

All we have to do is enforce the current laws.... arrest all the employers and that will end the problem.   If we need more fences... build em.   We don't need these   morons to do any of that.

lazs

[bj229r]

Ummm....when's the last time you were at a construction site? Not sure who we gonna get to build the fence, quite a catch-22 there

[john9001]

"During my 40 years in this business".

that says it all. term limits.

[lazs2]

yeah... I never was in construction much except for about 20 years.

How it worked was...  two pro painters could get there at 7.. the crew of mexicans were already there at 5 for another contractor on the same type houses.. the pro's would have a cig and coffee and get ready.. they mexicans would be on a full run... all 12 of em... at 4 the 2 pros would start cleaning up their tools and leave at 4:30 having painted the outside of 2 houses... neat clean work.

the 12 mexicans would stay till 8 to finish the  2 and a 1/10 houses they were working on and to throw dirt on the concrete they had painted by mistake and try to scrape the anodized window frames they oversprayed.

put the employers in jail and there will be plenty of people around to take the construction jobs.

You need people to work in the fields?  pay em.  get the brasero program back...  build machines to do the work.

Why do we feel it is ok to have slave labor in our own country?

lazs

[bj229r]

Why do we feel it is ok to have slave labor in our own country?

That's exactly what it is-- they work for far lower wages than legal guys would work for, to the point where jobsite unskilled 'laborers' are invariably illegal Mexicans, Guatemalans...Costa Ricans, Nicaraguans...and they are damn happy to get paid the pittance they get. I'm tryin not to feel sorry for them, but they are fediddleing up the blue collar wage structure in a LOT of areas, and labor-intensive businesses seem to have that equation burned into their fiscal plan

[lazs2]

arrest the employers... end of problem.

lazs

[Flatbar]

Originally posted by lazs2
arrest the employers... end of problem.

lazs

By far, the largest employers of illegal labor here in California are the large factory farms. Tossing site managers and foremen into the calaboose will do nothing to stop the owners from replaceing them and continuing on.

Taking away their means of making money would. What do you do to these type of owners?

Confiscate the land?

Impound their equipment on a national level?

Force them to give up large amounts of their crop thereby reducing their income for a given period of time?

Whatever is done to these 'boardroom farmers' you can be sure that not a single one of the rich factory farm CEO's will ever get the proper punishment or even one that will stop their greed for high and cost effective acarege yields on the backs of poor, uneducated brown folk.

I would suspect that if they tossed just one of these CEO's or maybe the board members from a single corporation into jail for these labor violations you could cause a sharp decrease in illegal laborers in other corporations.

Same could be done for the hotel industry. Toss Ol' Bill Marriott or maybe Paris Hilton's dad into the hoosegow for a few months and there WILL be a change in how employeers adhere to the labor and immigration laws.

Until then, it will be situation normal, AFU'd.