« The No Zone | Main | Most Americans Support NSA's Efforts »

President To Address Nation Monday Night

The subject is immigration.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush will speak from the Oval Office Monday about immigration and border security, hot-button issues that have inspired massive demonstrations and a growing political divide.

Starting at 8 p.m., the president is expected to talk for about 20 minutes, and might also address the National Guard's role in securing the borders.

White House spokesman Tony Snow announced the address earlier Friday. It will be the president's 21st nationwide address since he took office.

I disagree with President Bush on immigration. He has the sequencing all wrong, as Newt Gingrich outlined earlier in a piece in NRO. He wants to create a guest worker program without closing off the border.

Even so, I'm interested in what he has to say. Will it be the same old song and dance? The folks at Polipundit think they know.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference President To Address Nation Monday Night:

» The Sandbox linked with Bush To Address Immigration

Comments (28)

This is utter nonsense we h... (Below threshold)
Radical Centrist:

This is utter nonsense we have had numerous, so
called "immigration reforms." and all they have done is make things worse. We have had dozens upon dozens of small and large reforms and all it has done is to allow more and more illegal immigration and create more immigration lawyers. http://www.uscis.gov/graphics/shared/aboutus/statistics/legishist/index.htm

In 65' we amnestied 2 million with the promise that we were going to crackdown, no such thing happened the problem only got worse. In 86' we amnestied 5 million with the promise that we would get serious about illegal immigration, no such thing occurred. In 96' we had another round of immigration reform, we normalized a few million more, with you guessed it, a promise that we were going to honest injun, crack down. And here we are in 06' talking about normalizing between 11-20 million illegals, does anyone see a pattern here. Every so called reform only makes the problem worse every ten years or so. Also to those who are in favor of a guest worker program, you should have to answer the following questions.

1) What agency or agencies will be administering the guest worker program?
I assume it will be INS but INS is currently doing a horrific job enforcing
current laws and regulations. So it will need an enormous infusion of
funds or the creation of a new bureaucracy.

2) Is the guest worker program open for illegals already in country or for
new wokers not currently in country? Is this guest worker plan open to
every country in the world or is this strictly limited to south american

3) How will illegal immigrants take part in the guest worker program?
Will they be able to apply in-country or will they have to go to their
home country and apply?

4) Who will be able to apply, single men, men and woman, married
couples with children? What happens if the guest worker gets
pregnant and has a child or a guest worker fathers a child in-country?

5) What industries will be able to use guest workers?

6) How will employers place orders for guest workers?

7) I have heard proposals for up-to 1.5 million guest workers, once the
number has been set, will it be hard or soft cap?

8) What sort of non-forgeable documentation will be given to the guest worker?
Will the documentation list their country of origin, place of residence, and guest
worker occupation?
If a guest worker is fired or his job eliminated, will he have to leave the country
or will he be able to pursue a new guest worker occupation?

9) How will we keep track of the guest workers and make sure employers use
authorized guest workers only?

10) How long will a guest worker be allowed to participate in the program
before he must return to his home country?

11) Will they be allowed to pursue permanent status in-country or will they
have to return to their home country and apply?

12) What sort of boarder enforcement will be implemented?
We can't have a guest worker program and still have hundreds
of thousands of illegals streaming across the boarder.

Please feel free to add to the question list.

We are at a tipping point in our society. Our sovreignty is being challenged by a third world country. The Mexican government is for all-intents-and-purposes controlling our immigration policy. When I hear these politicians they seem to be more concerned with the rights of the illegals than the rights and wishes of the American people, and it disgusts me.

I have to admit, I really l... (Below threshold)

I have to admit, I really like what Newt says when he wrote:

For more than 20 years, the United States has failed to control the borders or enforce immigration laws while many U.S. businesses have profited by breaking the law. In turn, the U.S. government failure to enforce the immigration laws has encouraged outright defiance of federal authority by certain state and local jurisdictions. Adding insult to this deplorable state of affairs is an immigration bureaucracy that has been slow, cumbersome, rude, heartless, and incompetent in the discharge of its duties.

This dishonest system has lured millions to enter our country illegally and obtain work here illegally.

I think that is key to creating an understanding, and tempering the anger many have expressed over the "illegals" in our country. All these "illegals" have done is follow the yellow brick road in an attempt to find American dream for their families.

Some employers welcome them, some states look the other way at their illegal status, and when you add to that the fact that by failing to enforce the laws for many years we've created a situation that has lured these people into our country, it is understandable as to how we got to this point. They can come in illegally, find work, and not suffer ill consequences.

Yes, the time is long overdue to face up and deal with the situation, but we need to create a compromise that resolves it, instead of partisan divisions that only serve to perpetuate the problem further.

I salute Bush for his apparent attempt to grab the bull by the horns and wrestle this problem to the ground -- very "presidential" of him, imho.

The only thing I want to he... (Below threshold)

The only thing I want to hear from him on Monday night is something along the lines of, "We're starting construction on the fence tomorrow morning."

I'm sick of this debate being cast as one of "immigration reform". It's about B O R D E R S E C U R I T Y! If Mexicans can hop the border looking for jobs (or, in some cases, transporting drugs), then al Qaeda can send somebody over with weapons, explosives, or something worse.

Secure the f***ing border, then the politicos can talk about guest worker programs, amnesty, etc. all they want.

Let me guess. Bush will ann... (Below threshold)

Let me guess. Bush will announce that he's hired 2500 illegals to start construction on the fence.

The first thing out of the ... (Below threshold)
Charles Bannerman:

The first thing out of the box is to SEAL both borders and then MAYBE start a guest worker program. Once the borders are sealed there should be a concerted effort to identify all illegals in the country. That doesn't mean throw them out. If the number of illegals is anywhere near the numbers that have been talked about it would be impossible to deport all of them.

When the illegals are identified, those who are known gang members, prisoners or wanted for a crime should be deported fortwith.

Those who left should be taken off all public assistance and any kids they have whether born here or not should be required to learn English and attend classes geared to assimilation of our culture.

I think if they want to become citizens they should go to the bottom of the list and have to learn English before becoming citizens.

The above goes for all illegals not just Hispanic. We have hordes of Pakistanis, Indians, Asians etc. Most of whom do not assimilate.

The whole thing should demand that they assimilate or they are gone.

One thing that would drive ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

One thing that would drive the President's approval rating to near zero would be any talk of amnesty or guest worker programs until the border is secure. That means a real physical barrier that is monitored and maintained with no gaps from the gulf of Mexico to the Pacific ocean. I still think we should privatize enforcement against employers who hire illegals, which would dry up the job market fast. With no jobs available there will be little reason for people to come here illegally.

He will announce 10,000 Nat... (Below threshold)
Drew E.:

He will announce 10,000 National guard to seal the border..damn these guys and gals don't get a break..they go from 100 degrees in Iraq to another 100 degrees...and then he will announce support for the Senate plan of amnesty. He is looking at the over 40% of Latinos who voted Republican because they tend to be conservitive and share the "family values" veiwpoint. See the House plan of making 12 million instant felons just is not going to make it. ah for the old days of Republican unity. If good ole Tom "The hammer" Delay was not leaving because of K street legal issues.

There are battles going on for the soul of both parties. I am curious and unsure how they will play out.

It cracks me up how folks k... (Below threshold)
Drew E.:

It cracks me up how folks keep quoting Newt...didn't he used to be Speaker of the House and ..have to step down for a bunch of reasons? Notice I have nor ever will quote or praise that sleeze Clinton. I suggest some of try to find a less slimy source.

There is NO "amnesty" in th... (Below threshold)

There is NO "amnesty" in the President's proposal, or the compromise bill. Amnesty is a group PARDON, which requires NO ACTION on the pardonees. It is a gift.

We must have a guest worker program AND stricter enforcement, because we have a legitimate demand for unskilled/lower skilled laborers in this country. But even the GW program and the biggest fence you can build isn't going to stop the tide of illegal immigration UNTIL we do something about Mexico's domestic problem.

They are the "sick man of North America." With their natural and human resources, they should be growing at 8-10% annually and rivalling China on the world market. Instead, they are stuck between 1-2%, which is not good enough for even a fully developed industrial power like France, and is devastating in an undeveloped economy.

Vicente Fox has failed to reform the government. He has reneged on his promises to fight corruption, privatize the national oil and telephone companies, and cut personal taxes. As a result, the people are in crisis, and the only hope they see is north. Unaddressed, the result could be a Castro/Chavez style neocommunist regime in Mexico City. How is THAT for a security problem?

Until all three areas - our need for foreign workers, enforcement at the border, AND reforming the Mexican economy - are addressed, there will be NO solution to the waves of illegals we've seen in the last few years.

As for Polipundit, you can still get intelligent commentary from Lorie, D.J., Jayson, and Alex, but Poli himself has suffered a breakdown. All he can do is rant about illegals. He calls the President "Jorge Arbusto," "El Presidente," and worse. He's just like a moonbat or some Buchananite crazy now.

Lee-All these "... (Below threshold)


All these "illegals" have done is follow the yellow brick road in an attempt to find American dream for their families.

All I did was smoke dope!-- But, I was forced to do almost three years in "pound me in the ass" prison...(yet, too many seem to consider 'a year and a day' as somehow an overly severe penalty for a blatant violation of our national sovereignty...)

Still, I've always been a 'blue-collar' worker(my highest ever annual earnings was $35k- 10 years ago).

Meanwhile, I've paid over $15k in income /payroll/capital gains taxes over the last five years (single, no kids)...

IMO, every illegal who has been here five years should be required to pay this same $15,000 merely to stay here-- (plus 7% interest compounded quarterly for that entire period- paid in full, now!)... and every other illegal should be summarily deported.

I would love to be allowed to not pay any Income/ Socialist InSecurity /MediScare taxes for the next five years... Can I ignore all these taxes for the next 8-12 years--- yet pay only $2000. (total!) for this entire period with no other penalties?

Sign me up!

It will be the another sad ... (Below threshold)

It will be the another sad reading of the ONLY speech he knows.

Im gonna wager that it gets the low number.

I am not gonna watch it, the mans voice has begun to grate on me.

Of course so does anyone that Lies.

moonbatYou guys ba... (Below threshold)
PretzleNut MoonBat:


You guys bandy this word about alot.
DO you mean Qubbalists?
You know Talismans? Logos? Spells?

or do you mean the Greek VOX MUSICAE
and the Chants there in?

Socrates called the moon Selene, but he was a moonbat?

Perhaps the Father of the Republic Plato was a MoonBat?

Moonbat (n): A political epithet coined in 2002 by Perry de Havilland of "The Libertarian Samizdata," a libertarian weblog. It was originally a play on the last name of George Monbiot, a columnist for The Guardian, but now the term enjoys great currency in the Conservative blogosphere as an all-purpose insult for modern liberals, peace protestors, and other leftist kooks.

Yet I find this;
In Samizdata yesterday, Perry DeHaviland discusses the merits of mercenaries as an element of a better world.

Yikes, Mercenaries? Wasn't Jesus against that?
Murder is Good? Murder for Profit is Good?

WOW, I wonder who the Wackos really are here.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR

Woooo Son.

So you guys are Socialist Communist Moonbats?


The Moonbats say "My Master is Z"
Where does that Word Come 'Z'?

I will tell you John 1;1 AETZI

So the Hella Temple folks, Masonic Lodges are Moonbats? You know eastern mysticism?

Oh BTW didn't the three wise men find jesus by following the Stars? Oh My more moonbats!

Perhaps by Moonbats you mean the Apollo missions?

Of course RUSH has ate enough drugs to be a certified MOONBAT himself.

And to think, YOU guys thoght Samizdata MEANT CHRISTIAN..
What a bunch of FOOLS!!

BTW when bush does the AGGIE hand sign, thats not what it means. Its a Symbol to Volos, or Veles.


Do you guys even READ?

Put up a border wall, then ... (Below threshold)

Put up a border wall, then amnesty will be fine.

No hi-tech surveillance (only). That still requires enforcement, and the combo of big government and big business will prevent it. Same with troops. They will ist there temporarily, and then when we aren't looking, will be removed or disabled.

Physical barrier. THEN amnesty.

Anything else, and the GOP is going down.

Bring home the troops that ... (Below threshold)

Bring home the troops that are over there protecting the Euro-weenies. There is no need to have that many troops over there when we can whip the Russkies anytime we feel like it. These redeployed troops should be sent to the borders and this way they will get the desert training that they need when the terrorists in Iran decide that we need to glow in the dark. When they get there, issue a standing order to shoot to kill anyone that puts one toe over the line. If the ACLU and LaRaza bitch, use them for target practice.

What will qualify as "work"... (Below threshold)

What will qualify as "work" for a "guest worker" visa?

Phone card seller?
Tamale vendor?
The frozen-fruit pushcart vendors?
Can minors claim to be babysitters and get guestworker visas?
Swap meet vendor?
Selling snacks and trinkets from your home?
Renting out your garage or converted rooms to illegals - would that be considered "work?"
How about day laborers who can't prove they ahve a steady employer?

What about those who don't work, like the elderly, minors, those welfare recipients getting benefits on their US born children's backs? What about criminals? How would these people be allowed to remain if they don't work? Surely lawsuits will be filed by human rights and immigration orgs to ensure everyone can share in the pie and force the governemnt to make exceptions and make inelgible people eligible, just like the government did in the 1986 amnesty after several lengthy and costly lawsuits (one that only took 19 years to litigate to force the government to change the rules to make 400,000 ineligible aliens, eligible.)

And where is the incentive to even hire guest workers, now that they have the same rights as American workers and have to have the same deductions legal workers do, and are entitled to at least minimum wage? Why wouldn't an employer
in certain high-turnover, labor-intensive fields ignore the complexities of hiring a guest worker, and simply hire another illegal for less pay, under the table, when there is virtually no chance of being fined or arrested?

With backlogs of millions of applications with CIS already in the works for the various applications for a wide range of immigration benefits, if a guestworker program or amnesty is implemented, even if token additional staff are added, the fact remains that the sheer amount of work in processing, receiving and vetting applications and the assorted work that goes with them (interviewing, fraud investigations, verifying documentation) will without a doubt affect any application already pending, including those who waited and want to enter the US the right way. To say that any amnesty/guestworker program will not propel illegals to the front of the line or give illegals special privilege is utterly false. Will enforcement officers be pulled from their duties to accommodate the processing of millions of expectant guestworkers, like what happened in 1986, and Citizenship USA?

Hmmm.1. Newt Gingr... (Below threshold)


1. Newt Gingrich was in the House of Representatives when the 1986 amnesty was made into law. Did he vote against it? If not, then our current problems are his fault.

So don't ask me to listen to the schmuck.

2. Anyone who thinks automatically turning 20 million illegals into citizens is going to solve anything is fooling himself. One additional problem is that the 20 million illegals are going to want to bring in relatives. So that 20 million number is going to balloon to 120 million. And that's if each newly minted citizen brings in only 5 relatives on average. If that number is upped to 10 relatives per, then that's 220 million.

And don't say it can't happen. When you add 20 million voters to the rolls in a span of a few years, all sort of crazy-ass nonsense is going to happen. Particularly if they're both invested in and intent upon radically changing the political landscape. And increasing the allowed limits on annual legal immigration for close relatives will be very easy to get passed for a solid block of 20 million new voters.

And I'm a first generation immigrant born in Seoul, South Korea. So no fucking dumbass remarks about how I hate immigrants or such nonsense.

3. Assimilating 20 million illegals is going to be tough enough. Assimilating 120-220 million over the span of a single generation is not even credible.

4. President Bush is pushing the idea of sticking 5,000 to 10,000 NG troops along the border because it's a completely IMPERMANENT solution. The troops can be moved in, and then quietly moved on out. No muss, no fuss. That's the deal.

If 5,000 - 10,000 border patrol agents were to be hired, then all sorts of holy hell would be raised if Bush or the GOP tried to lay them off or fire them. But NG troops all coming from different states on different rotations *and* with Iraq still in play?

I figure there'll be a "necessity" for moving those NG troops to Iraq shortly after the Nov election. So no, I don't believe that anything will come of the Monday speech.

5. There is not one single example of a guest worker program that hasn't, doesn't and isn't causing enormous problems.


Frankly I think that Bush and the GOP feel that they can do a song-n-dance and the conservatives will just fall into line. What they're desperately trying to discover is the correct song and the right dance that'll do the job without them actually having to solve the issue the way conservatives want it solved.

Someone's going to be really disappointed on Monday.

Hmmm.Pret... (Below threshold)


PretzleNut MoonBat

Yo liberals: Is this asshat one of yours?

It's been announced that Bu... (Below threshold)

It's been announced that Bush has a plan to place the national guard on the border. It's a stop gap measure. Quite literally. Emergency plumbing, and probably more than a finger in the dike. Consider old Eastern Europe. They had to have a fenced border to keep their population in. Must have been a pretty total wall - and a no-man's-land. We do need the same, alas. Do the math: something like 10% of Mexico's population is in the USA illegally. Did you catch that? I wrote


that "literally two thirds of Mexicans want to be in America. No, wait! - that's like all the Mexicans - all the adult Mexicans. Seventy million - there must be 36 million kids in Mexico, I'd suppose. That's ugly - a depopulated Mexico, abandoned except for all the kids. And such a noise of weeping ... at least from the kids ... the adults would be celebrating up north, maybe outside city hall. How crappy must Mexico be, that no adult wants to be there? Even a third of the educated people, the ones with real opportunity and chances for success - that tiny little fraction - want to be here. And these people are racist for themselves, over this? Well, no, that's not it, of course. It isn't that Mexico is crappy. As not-American countries go, it's okay. It's just that it isn't America."

I know - jingoistic. But am I wrong?

The pressure is on Mr. Bush, and for all that he sticks by his guns, he is a politician. He'll still go for his "uninvited guest worker" program, but he get's it, I bet, that he needs to SECURE the border.


He will announce amnesty an... (Below threshold)

He will announce amnesty and tell the illegals they are entitled to all the back social security money they've paid in. Thus crippling our already strained system. Then he will announce in state college tuition and scholorships which will fill the limited freshman classroom seats, resulting in your children not going to college. He will then talk about family values before he tells you that every illegal getting amnesty can have his entire family join in. Then he will cover his bill of "a new deal" for illegals, including free money and housing. He will then require all employers to hire a percentage of illegals to do the jobs you are willing to do. But you won't understand any of this because as of Monday night, all Presidential addresses will be in Spanish.

So we seal the borders; fin... (Below threshold)

So we seal the borders; fine. How well would that have worked for Britain last year? Those people grew up in the country they blew up.

What exactly will that do for us here? If you seal the borders but fail to secure the ports, what have you got? If the thing you most fear is al Queda bringing bombs over the border, do you feel okay about them bringing them in by ship?

So say we secure the ports; there are plenty of things to make bombs of out of here, plenty of American Muslims to "get radicalized" as per Britain's 9/11, plenty of people to insult and polarize and otherwise inspire. Do we shell out this money to build a wall so that we can delay the inevitable?

Build a wall if it really fixes what's wrong with illegal immigration; if the country is worse off as a whole after you've done this, take the hit like a grownup.

But don't tell me we're safer for having a wall; that's two-dimensional thinking and worse. My personal opinion is that this is just one more excuse to set out a no-bid contract for the Big Boys.

Well he try to convince us ... (Below threshold)
Eon the terrible:

Well he try to convince us that the illegal aleins are good for this nation becuase they will take jobs that ordanary americans wont take?

Hmmm.Buil... (Below threshold)


Build a wall if it really fixes what's wrong with illegal immigration; if the country is worse off as a whole after you've done this, take the hit like a grownup.

I'll agree to that, and you can bookmark this comment btw if you like, but then YOU have to agree completely to the construction of a wall and the mass deportation of illegal aliens.

And btw: Just because something doesn't fix *every* problem all in one go doesn't mean it's a bad idea to actually try and fix *some* problems as best we can.

America is an ideal. A dream. An ephermal concept that can just as quickly disappear. We'd all like to believe that cannot happen, but America's foundation is based not just on the Constitution or other such documents. It's based on the aggregate values and ideals of it's citizens.

My fear, and it's an actual fear, is that introducing so many people who have not been innoculated with those values and ideals will cause a dilution thereof and a potentially catastrophic dislocation of that foundation.

Sounds absurd. Yet stand on the Walls of Babylon and tell me that anything is permanent. I'm a first generation immigrant and I love America. If the occasion arose I'd willingly die for America, which is why I joined the USMC as a young man. Ask any *legal* immigrant how they feel about America, and you'd get the same spiel.

America is unique and those elements that make America are themselves volatile. At various points in America's history any number of things could have happened that could have changed America in a myriad of ways.

Early on the national language could have been German, which would have likely caused a close relationship with Germany rather than England. In the aftermath of the Mexican War there were many discussions on annexation of Mexico and the rest of Central America. During the 1920's there was a massive rise in Communism in America and it was possible for a short time that America could have adopted those principles. It wasn't all that long ago when it was an accepted practice that men would die in union strikes.

We look back at all this as absurd but the ideals of today may not be the ideals of tomorrow. And perhaps not for the better.


And now I've vomited this excessive screed onto Kim's post it's time for my first cup of coffee. If I've rambled, then sorry about that.

As we militarize our border... (Below threshold)

As we militarize our border with NG troops expect as response that will include terrorist tactics, IED's and attempts to provoke NG use of force with civilian casualties to further world-wide sympathy. I'm not saying don't do it, just don't be surprised at the results. Interestingly, the training for Iraq will pay dividends in dealing with these issues.

Look, this situation is as serious as Stage IV cancer. The treatment will not be pretty. It will hurt. There is no guarantee that it will work. But what is guaranteed is the disintegration of our country if we don't act soon. History teaches us well on this point.

Do I expect W to say as much?


So, from reading the commen... (Below threshold)

So, from reading the comments here, it is apparent that Bush really is a world-class loser. Maybe the Rolling Stone article was right, eh? Judging from the recent drop in job approval rating it (RS article) was rather prophetic, heavily-lathered barking right-wing apologists notwithstanding.

Sounds like the consensus is that in an attempt to appease the far right-wing constituency, Bush will on Monday announce a plan to spend way too much money doing way too little.

Who voted for this guy, anyway?

[email protected] Lee... (Below threshold)


@ Lee

So, from reading the comments here, it is apparent that Bush really is a world-class loser.

Wrong again.

Bush's poll ratings have dropped because he has diverged from the conservative base. There are a lot of issues that concern many conservatives, but there are a few specific issues that concern all conservatives. And illegal immigration, judicial nominations of strict constitutionalists and defending the country are those issues.

As you may recall Bush's poll numbers tanked badly when he nominated Harriet Miers.

Maybe the Rolling Stone article was right, eh? Judging from the recent drop in job approval rating it (RS article) was rather prophetic, heavily-lathered barking right-wing apologists notwithstanding.

Completely wrong. What Bush has accomplished so far will put him directly into the upper levels of successful Presidents. He's overseen a country wracked by attacks, a severely damaged economy and a ridiculous position on international terrorism. During his terms of office he's managed to rebuild the economy so that it's far surpassed the economies of countries that have never been attacked. Safeguarded the country in many ways and attacked international terrorism until it's been hammered back.

Besides. Who really gives a rat's ass what anyone at Rolling Stone thinks? Who the hell reads that rag anymore anyways?

Sounds like the consensus is that in an attempt to appease the far right-wing constituency, Bush will on Monday announce a plan to spend way too much money doing way too little.

Actually it's not a concensus. Nobody's sure what he's going to propose, except that anything but the strictest closing and walling off of the border isn't going to cut it.

Who voted for this guy, anyway?

Hey I would have voted Democrat but you bastards nominated Al Gore and John Kerry. Might as well hang a sign up saying "Don't make a Democrat President!". Really now. Al Gore was like Bill Clinton without the political acumen or the charm. You ever actually sit through one of his speeches?

And John Kerry? Oh be real. He was more of a wooden plank than Gore was. And that crazy nonsense about him and sports. Could he be any more fake?

And who else was out there? McCain? Mr. "Who the hell needs the First Amendment anyways?" McCain? No thanks then, no thanks now, no thanks in 2008+.

As for the rest of the Democractic Nazgul in the 2004 Presidential election, it's a really sad thing when Al Sharpton had more personality than the rest of the entire pack.

Want me to vote Democrat? No problem. My family is Democrat. Been that way for as long as anyone can remember. Certainly well before 1880. I didn't turn Republican until around 1984. So voting Democrat isn't a problem.

All you have to do is provide a candidate that isn't mad as a hatter.

Since there appears to be S... (Below threshold)

Since there appears to be SO much opposition to any type of "Guest Worker Program" on the net, why not link all the comments together and send them to Washington?
It beats marching in the streets!

Quote from Adjoran: "There ... (Below threshold)

Quote from Adjoran: "There is NO "amnesty" in the President's proposal, or the compromise bill. Amnesty is a group PARDON, which requires NO ACTION on the pardonees. It is a gift."

You sir are an idiot. From The 'Lectric Law Library's Legal Lexicon On

"AMNESTY - Indicates a general remission of punishment, penalty, retribution, or disfavor to a whole group or class; it may imply a promise to forget.

An act of oblivion of past offences, granted by the government to those who have been guilty of any neglect or crime, USUALLY upon condition that they return to their duty within a certain period.

An amnesty is either express or implied; it is express, when so declared in direct terms; and it is implied, when a treaty of peace is made between contending parties.

Amnesty and pardon, are very different. The former is an act of the sovereign power, the object of which is to efface and to cause to be forgotten, a crime or misdemeanor; the latter, is an act of the same authority, which exempts the individual on whom it is bestowed from the punishment the law inflicts for the crime he has committed. Amnesty is the abolition and forgetfulness of the offence; pardon is forgiveness. A pardon is given to one who is certainly guilty, or has been convicted; amnesty, to those who may have been so.

Their effects are also different. That of pardon, is the remission of the whole or a part of the punishment awarded by the law; the conviction remaining unaffected when only a partial pardon is granted: an amnesty on the contrary, has the effect of destroying the criminal act, so that it is as if it had not been committed, as far as the public interests are concerned."

Quote from Adjoran: "We must have a guest worker program AND stricter enforcement, because we have a legitimate demand for unskilled/lower skilled laborers in this country."

First, since when because greedy bastards want cheap labor and want the the taxpayer to pay for the cost of actually caring for these people do they have a right to make us import a tax burden? Makes no sense.

Second, how are these "guest workers" unless they leave and there is a mechanism by which to remove those who will refuse to leave? What happened with the guest workers programs in Germany and France?

Do you really want to see LA or Dallas burn like Paris has?

Quote from Adjoran: "But even the GW program and the biggest fence you can build isn't going to stop the tide of illegal immigration UNTIL we do something about Mexico's domestic problem."

So American is responsible for fixing Mexico and until our saintly politicians will "fix" the Mexican culture of political corruption we shouldn't try? Question: Are you high?

Sure, a fence won't stop eveyone but to argue as you do is an fallacy of perfection. How do you enforcement won't work unless you try it?

And in regards to saying that secure our borders in impossible let me quote Andrew J. Bacevich:

'Since the end of the Cold War, having come to value military power for its own sake, the United States has abandoned this principle and is committed as a matter of policy to maintaining military capabilities far in excess of those of any would-be adversary or combination of adversaries. This commitment finds both a qualitative and quantitative expression, with the U.S. military establishment dwarfing that of even America's closest ally. Thus, whereas the U.S. Navy maintains and operates a total of twelve large attack aircraft carriers, the once-vaunted Royal Navy has none--indeed, in all the battle fleets of the world there is no ship even remotely comparable to a Nimitz-class carrier, weighing in at some ninety-seven thousand tons fully loaded, longer than three football fields, cruising at a speed above thirty knots, and powered by nuclear reactors that give it an essentially infinite radius of action. Today, the U.S. Marine Corps possesses more attack aircraft than does the entire Royal Air Force--and the United States has two other even larger "air forces," one an integral part of the Navy and the other officially designated as the U.S. Air Force. Indeed, in terms of numbers of men and women in uniform, the U.S. Marine Corps is half again as large as the entire British Army--and the Pentagon has a second, even larger "army" actually called the U.S. Army--which in turn also operates its own "air force" of some five thousand aircraft) All of these massive and redundant capabilities cost money. Notably, the present-day Pentagon budget, adjusted for inflation, is 12 percent larger than the average defense budget of the Cold War era. In 2002, American defense spending exceeded by a factor of twenty-five the combined defense budgets of the seven "rogue states" then comprising the roster of U.S. enemies. Indeed, by some calculations, the United States spends more on defense than all other nations in the world together). This is a circumstance without historical precedent.
Furthermore, in all likelihood, the gap in military spending between the United States and all other nations will expand further still in the years to come. Projected increases in the defense budget will boost Pentagon spending in real terms to a level higher than it was during the Reagan era. According to the Pentagon's announced long-range plans, by 2009 its budget will exceed the Cold War average by 23 percent--despite the absence of anything remotely resembling a so-called peer competitor. However astonishing this fact might seem, it elicits little comment, either from political leaders or the press. It is simply taken for granted. The truth is that there no longer exists any meaningful context within which Americans might consider the question: "How much is enough?"

Are saying that American with most powerful military that has ever existed and spend more on its defense than every other nation on the planet combined cannot stop poor unarmed and uneducated Mexicans from crossing the Rio Grande?

What ever are you smoking?

Quote from Adjoran: "Vicente Fox has failed to reform the government. He has reneged on his promises to fight corruption, privatize the national oil and telephone companies, and cut personal taxes. As a result, the people are in crisis, and the only hope they see is north. Unaddressed, the result could be a Castro/Chavez style neocommunist regime in Mexico City. How is THAT for a security problem?"

If you understand that then why in heaven's name do want to import with a "guest worker program" the very folks likely to start a neocommunist revoluation in Mexico here to the United States? Are you mad?

Quote: "Until all three areas - our need for foreign workers, enforcement at the border, AND reforming the Mexican economy - are addressed, there will be NO solution to the waves of illegals we've seen in the last few years."

We have no NEED for illegal invaders who contribute about 1% of the GDP. 75% of workers in agriculture are legals and there is no area of the economy dominated by illegal alien labor. The fact is the CONSENSUS among economists that the currect levels of immigration into the United States bring no aggregate gain to the native-born Americans.

Quote: "As for Polipundit, you can still get intelligent commentary from Lorie, D.J., Jayson, and Alex, but Poli himself has suffered a breakdown. All he can do is rant about illegals. He calls the President "Jorge Arbusto," "El Presidente," and worse. He's just like a moonbat or some Buchananite crazy now."

You sir are the moonbat as what you have said in nothing more than blame American for Mexico's problems and American is powerless so lets rollover to the socialist screaming in the street.

American has power to end illegal immigration by enforcing the law and building a fence. It will take time and we will have to work hard but good things take time and effort to accomplish.

<a href="http://www.magmare... (Below threshold)

Biometrics Security and Illegal Immigration

The speech was very clear: from now on, any foreigner willing to go legally in the United States in order to work there will have to communicate his fingerprints while entering the country.They will have to subject themselves to these procedures, formerly only imposed to criminals and to spies, not to immigrants and visitors, and even less to citizens.

Indeed, Bush said in his addresses on Immigration Reform:

"A key part of that system [for verifying documents and work eligibility of aliens] should be a new identification card for every legal foreign worker. This card should use biometric technology, such as digital fingerprints, to make it tamper-proof."

The proposal launched by president Bush to deploy the National Guard at the Mexican border and to introduce sophisticated electronic devices is only part of a brilliant communication strategy. Its actual function is not to protect the border, but to direct public attention far from the true reform set in motion by the Bush Administration: biometric security.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy