Comments on: Bush Defends Immigration Deal

President Slams Critics Who Say Plan Offers Amnesty To Illegal Immigrants

[toldyouso21]

Just that one sentence speaks volumes. Americans are unwilling to do what it takes to be self sufficient--so the answer is to kowtow to this hangup and indolence?
Americans need to bite their own bullet, particularly since most do not want the down side of an illegal or amnestied inheritance of 12 to 20 million new people. Either we make do with less or start working in the fields or hire the LEGAL immigrant applicants. The other problem is that employers will never follow the laws if they do not have to. If/when these illegals gain legitimacy, they will demand benefits and pay raises--employers will off load them into American society and just go back for a new set and government will again wink and turn a blind eye.

Laws are not ignored because they can't be enforced, they are ignored because businesses demand they be--and government is in collusion with that. So this will never stop.

As for the need for labor, why not make a part of the LEGAL immigrant process, that priority will be given to those willing to work in those jobs and accelerate that process? Why ever reward people for cutting in the line and disregarding the laws?

Should be mandatory prison time and HUGE fines for each illegal--but who will enforce it if Congress and the Feds shoot such laws down? Like they just did in Farmer's Branch, TX?

[nottellin1]

I voted for Bush and still stand by that vote, Kerry would have been no better. However, when all this is over I will be reevaluating my party loyalties depending on who actually does the right thing for America.

[nottellin1]

I voted for Bush and still stand by that vote, Kerry would have been no better. However, when all this is over I will be reevaluating my party loyalties depending on who actually does the right thing for America.

[klingon69]

I disagree.
Why am I not surprised?
Increasing the fines and penalties for employers is not going to happen. First of all they are too powerful as lobbyists in both parties, but more importantly they, and we, need the cheap labor from Mexico in order to compete.
Don't include ME in your WE!

If we managed to kick them out we would miss them and regret doing it.
Posted by RandalDS at 02:29 AM : May 30, 2007
No, I won't regret it one little bit.

[toldyouso21]

Posted by realpatriot1 at 11:06 AM : May 30, 2007

I don't have much of a quarrel with what you said, except-- the "enforcement and system being touted is the same one from 1986--essentially there is little difference--so it was not enforced then--why believe in it now? Bush is giving us the same 'okie doke' that he is for the war--more of the same--just repkg it and feed it to us again--he and Congress figure we are too stupid and weak to notice it was the same swill. Although many in favor do not even know what the amnesty program of 1986 was--(enforcement, just the one group in, because they were sooo needed, a system to vet and fines and enforcement on employers) see how well it did not work? Don't fall for the okie doke--demand real accountability and do not advocate or root for the band aid and repkg of an old failed policy.

No law works when it is not enforced, as for labor needs--what is wrong with taking potential workers from the legitimate line? And why can't we deport the people? I can pick out at least 75 to 100 illegals everyday, myself--if we all did it--it could be done. The hype is just hype--I am not a defeatist--the only thing worse than failing is not trying in the first place--let's try to deport the 12 million, let's try to imprison company principals and fine them.... then if/when it and the border fence fails--we can rethink the amnesty gambit

[cbgb31]

I'm convinced the only way for America to succeed as a self governing nation is to kick the multi-national corp. out of the country. Highly restrict their access to federal govt. and open up the country to small business innovation (real sole proprietors,not big business disguised as mom and pop). We really need to get our country back and it's our generation who has to do it otherwise it'll be gone forever.

[cbgb31]

If we managed to kick them out we would miss them and regret doing it.
Posted by RandalDS at 02:29 AM : May 30, 2007

That's a risk I'm willing to take.

[toldyouso21]

But if a democrat were to stand up for our American rights, and for doing what's necessary to fix this abomonation of justice, I'd probably vote for them - even being a republican businessman.
Posted by Infidel_US at 10:47 AM : May 30, 2007

Ironic you should state that--because I am willing to overlook the war travesty, and vote Republican--- if Republicans will stand up against this illegal immigration policy. There are more ways to invade, occupy and destroy a country than by using a military. I see huge flaws in both parties and I am not self serving enough or greedy enough to overlook those flaws. Both are willing to sacrifice the American middle class for short term greed and benefits to a few.
Both try to claim a mandate that neither side has. Neither appears to have the decency, honor or backbone to take on Bush and stop this madness in Iraq--both appear to eager to please a few and they no longer seem to have personal convictions and willing to risk all to stand by them. (except Bush and he is a nutcase) But I am no bleeding heart either. I believe in the law--and not just when it is convenient for me. Both parties would do well to stop giving lip service to our laws and start following them, themselves.

[toldyouso21]

Posted by Infidel_US at 10:47 AM : May 30, 2007

Well...I actually prefer Democrats to Republicans though they and I differ on several issues (like the death penalty and illegal immigration) I am, a believer in some of the social issues that the Democrats champion, though they were wrong on welfare and the Republicans got that right. I have to stay independent of both because neither actually represents where I stand. I am sort of a Rockefeller/Hagel/Pat Buchanan type of thinker: Conservative government, promotion of programs to assist ALL the people, mind our own business and keep American jobs home, competetive wages and no illegal wars. The Republicans totally had that idea wrong--Democracy imposed is not democracy at all and will be resisted by the local population*

*because we went into Iraq under the pretense of either WMD or freeing them, we do not have the political/moral imperative now of crushing the people we said we gave democracy too--it would shatter the illusion of why we are there. So we are stuck--caught between our lies about why we are there and a puppet regime we put in power that we already know and acknowledge no longer reflect the will of the avg. Iraqi.

[cbgb31]

Posted by rodm54 at 10:28 AM : May 30, 2007

BRAVO, rodm54, I agree.

[cbgb31]

The overwhelming majority of Americans don't have the land or the income to grow their own food and raise their own meat. Posted by realpatriot1 at 11:06 AM : May 30, 2007


THis is a very good point and one that hasn't been raised or debated. We are facing a future of energy, water, and possibly food shortages in the not too distant future. Why are we wanting to add exponentially to our population. If anything we should be downsizing to an independently sustainable nature. Why do we want to be a nation as crowded as India or China. We've always been able to compete better with less.

[pepperp1]

What absolute BS the President and the Congress betrayed this country and our soldiers for the special interest of a minority and a delusional belief that they, as unaccomplished as they were, knew better? This country would not have supported the invasion of Iraq had they grasped that the true intent was to clean up the neighborhood and make if safer for Israel, Saudi Arabia and the energy companies. The proof is obvious in the puppetry orchestrated on the American People by this Administration and the neo conservative media to fool people into believing that Iraq attacked us on 911 and that a mushroom cloud was a nano second possibility.

[realpatriot1]

toldyouso21,

The process that you described in your own hiring process is pretty much what I would like to see as immigration reform. Naturalized citizens whose status can be confirmed should receive priority in hiring for jobs that they want.

Here's the thing. The overwhelming majority of Americans don't have the land or the income to grow their own food and raise their own meat. Most Americans need relatively inexpensive food to make ends meet and aren't willing to do the hard physical labor under the conditions that are required to keep the food affordable. It's a matter of economics. Lots of food is imported but most has to be grown near market. That's one industry and every industry and situatiion is different.

There is a need for some guest workers in some industries and we need an orderly process for accomodating that need that will give the people willing to do the work a status to be confirmed, a way to pay into the system, and won't leapfrog naturalized citizens for jobs that're desirable to them.

I'm not saying that this legislation does that. I'm just saying that's what we need and total deportation is not the answer.

Employers who don't take the responsible steps you've taken should be held accountable. It would be nice if everyone did so voluntarily like you but that's clearly not happening, and neither will mass deportation ever happen. Any system is a positive first step away from the current anarchy.

[gkc99]

So the kingdom of neocondom doesn't like Bushit's Mexican plan? But he is the Commander in Chief, the Decider, the President of the United States. How dare your undercut his position with your whining and complaining, you disloyal, unpatriotic, cowardly Righties? Bushit was elected by the people to lead, and now you don't like where it's leading? Why don't you move to Europe if you don't like it here?

I love it! Still hate Bushit tho'.

[infidel_us]

toldyouso21,

The republicans had both houses for 12 years and squandered their opportunity to affect real change. I'm very happy with the two party system. I think we need democrats in order to show how lame they and their politics are.

But if a democrat were to stand up for our American rights, and for doing what's necessary to fix this abomonation of justice, I'd probably vote for them - even being a republican businessman.

[toldyouso21]

Posted by Infidel_US at 10:06 AM : May 30, 2007

The irony is, he owns this land and has illegals doing the lawn work and cleaning his pool. I live next door, my husband mows the lawn and I do most of the other work, we have a creek at the bottom of our land and I own 1/3 of a lake, for cleaning, I use a rake and a net and muck out the creek (handles the lake over flow) He says we need the illegals and specifically he needs the illegals to do the menial jobs (as if they are born servants and will stay that way) We have to do more and are doing it ourselves--and we are just fine.

This reliance is illusory, it is no different than the really fat person who thinks they need a mobile cart to get around the store--when really walking would actually be good for them--and WAS the only way they could have gotten around in the past--now many claim they could not shop without the use of them--and yet....SOMEHOW THEY WERE ALWAYS GETTING THE FOOD TO GET SO HUGE...... hmmmmmmm. We can and would survive, adjust and either do without or tone down our usage for things imported or the use of illegal labor. That arguement is a lie and a scare tactic. It is not because we need them--it is because in lieu of actually paying living wages, businesses want them. Americans need to stop confusing needs with wants and also need to stop thinking that if we do not continue a thing--life would stop. This is not true--life would adjust. It always has, it always will.

[arembee3]

Like most of the concepts put forth by this administration I feel strongly that this immigration "solution" is ill concieved and will be poorly administrated....Typical G.W.B.

[rodm54]

Bush's amnesty plan will erect a permanent wall between haves and have-nots in America. There will be two classes of Americans, a small minority that becomes rich by exploiting low-paid workers, and a vast underclass of those who are exploited.

While that may not sound like "your" America, it's actually all around you. Visit any city in the heartland of the U.S., one where the economy is based on food-processing, and you'll see it.

Republicans broke the labor unions, there, back in the eighties and employers sent buses to the border to gather up workers with more "reasonable" job expectations. More illegals and their family members were not far behind.

Twenty years later, those same communities have been destroyed. Wages and benefits have been cut by more than half, ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION. The tax base has contracted violently, while costs for schools, hospitals and jails have gone through the roof. There is no work for the native-born. Economic refugees, they can either flee or open a meth-lab.

That is illegal-immigration as I have experienced it. If you've made enough money off of illegals to live behind a wall, to hire personal security and send your kids to private schools, then I suppose you're feeling pretty smug about the whole issue. For EVERYONE else, U.S. citizens, that is, it's an unmitigated disaster.

rm

[toldyouso21]

To me, that's not a fair exchange for having cheap laborers to clean my pool.
Posted by Infidel_US at 10:06 AM : May 30, 2007


He is a Republican businessman. If that one party would end up being his own and if the police state would reward political sycophants--then most likely, he would be all for it. Most people have a problem with elitism and tyranny when they do not benefit from it. If they personally can benefit--then many can/do justify it.

[reel-crazy]

toldyouso21:

I agree. No leading questions.

"Do you support amnnesty for illegal immigrants?"

Period.