Pres. Bush devoted his weekly radio address last Saturday to the fact that the Democrats who control Congress can’t seem to get their work done. And he used the failed immigration bill as an example.
I have no lost love for the Democrats, but Bush is way off base here and everyone knows it. I am beginning to wonder if the President has lost his marbles. From what I can tell, the immigration bill failed because of the Republicans in Congress, not the Democrats. Reid was right when he told Bush that the Lefties had their votes lined up; the GOP was the one who couldn’t get the votes for passage.
Now the true Republicans were right to defeat the immigration bill. It was the wrong thing to do. And the voters did a good job of telling them to vote against it.
What I don’t get is why Bush would bring it up now and blame the Democrats. He knows better than that. I just don’t know what he’s up to. Maybe he’s trying to shame them in to passing the budget bill, but he’s going to have to do better than that. It just won’t do for him to say the things he did when everyone knows it ain’t so. Things in Foggy Bottom are getting stranger all the time.
Sunday, July 8, 2007
Saturday, July 7, 2007
If I were President...
The “grand bargain” bunch didn’t get away with their compromise. The way I see it, the bargain was votes for the politicians, cheap labor for some employers, and a sweet deal for the illegals. The rest of America was supposed to hold their noses and live with it.
We’ve learned some things about this illegal alien problem as a result of the Senate’s failure to pass reform. Here are a few lessons Washington should have learned:
1) You can’t bargain with promises, especially if they are old promises you should already be keeping.
2) In this Internet age, don’t criticize the people. Pres. Bush called the Minutemen “vigilantes” and told us it was un-American to be opposed to his bill. Sen. Lott attacked talk radio. Sorry fellas, we’re voters too, and nothing brings out the Silent Majority like name calling by our leaders.
3) The compromise gave away too much and yielded too little. Somehow, legalizing all of the aliens and only reducing the flow by 25% is not much of a compromise.
4) It did nothing to minimize the current local impact of the problem.
5) You can’t eliminate chain migration and still keep family unification.
6) We need to make strong statements in order to deter future illegal immigration.
7) We aren’t as dumb as we look.
If I were Bush, I’d send a message to the illegals: Go home on your own because it will no longer be business as usual.
I’d begin by releasing the Border Patrol Guards Campeon and Ramos.
I would then take advantage of all the illegals in custody in local jails around the country and get them on the list for deportation. (Yes, there will be a need for many more beds.)
I would propose emergency funding for more border fence and more border patrol agents. Maybe not $4.4 billion, but a sizeable amount.
I would tax remittances back to Mexico. A 10% tax would yield $2.3 billion a year.
I would challenge Congress to fix three significant magnets for border crossers:
1) Anchor baby citizenship.
2) Free emergency room care.
3) Free public education.
I would start putting the employers in jail.
I would get a handle on the visa overstayers. Both Chertoff and Ridge say it accounts for 40% of the illegal alien leakage. The US VISIT technology isn’t working. It’s time to do something else. The law is clear that if you are out of status on your visa, you are deportable. How about a little fear through selective enforcement?
I would fire Chertoff. He obviously doesn’t have the stomach to do what needs to be done.
Well, Bush lacks the political will to do any of these things. Aside from taxing remittances and the three magnets mentioned above, he already has the laws in place to do the rest.
So the third world will continue to invade until someone comes along who does. I believe it will take another terrorist attack on U S soil, traced to the Mexican border, to make it happen.
We’ve learned some things about this illegal alien problem as a result of the Senate’s failure to pass reform. Here are a few lessons Washington should have learned:
1) You can’t bargain with promises, especially if they are old promises you should already be keeping.
2) In this Internet age, don’t criticize the people. Pres. Bush called the Minutemen “vigilantes” and told us it was un-American to be opposed to his bill. Sen. Lott attacked talk radio. Sorry fellas, we’re voters too, and nothing brings out the Silent Majority like name calling by our leaders.
3) The compromise gave away too much and yielded too little. Somehow, legalizing all of the aliens and only reducing the flow by 25% is not much of a compromise.
4) It did nothing to minimize the current local impact of the problem.
5) You can’t eliminate chain migration and still keep family unification.
6) We need to make strong statements in order to deter future illegal immigration.
7) We aren’t as dumb as we look.
If I were Bush, I’d send a message to the illegals: Go home on your own because it will no longer be business as usual.
I’d begin by releasing the Border Patrol Guards Campeon and Ramos.
I would then take advantage of all the illegals in custody in local jails around the country and get them on the list for deportation. (Yes, there will be a need for many more beds.)
I would propose emergency funding for more border fence and more border patrol agents. Maybe not $4.4 billion, but a sizeable amount.
I would tax remittances back to Mexico. A 10% tax would yield $2.3 billion a year.
I would challenge Congress to fix three significant magnets for border crossers:
1) Anchor baby citizenship.
2) Free emergency room care.
3) Free public education.
I would start putting the employers in jail.
I would get a handle on the visa overstayers. Both Chertoff and Ridge say it accounts for 40% of the illegal alien leakage. The US VISIT technology isn’t working. It’s time to do something else. The law is clear that if you are out of status on your visa, you are deportable. How about a little fear through selective enforcement?
I would fire Chertoff. He obviously doesn’t have the stomach to do what needs to be done.
Well, Bush lacks the political will to do any of these things. Aside from taxing remittances and the three magnets mentioned above, he already has the laws in place to do the rest.
So the third world will continue to invade until someone comes along who does. I believe it will take another terrorist attack on U S soil, traced to the Mexican border, to make it happen.
Friday, July 6, 2007
Tony and Mirthala
LA has a Hispanic mayor; the first one in that town since 1872. His name is Antonio Villaraigosa. His girlfriend is a reporter for the Spanish TV Network Telemundo. And they’ve been seeing each other for about a year now.
The trouble is that the mayor is married to someone else and has two children from his wife and two adult children from other “relationships”. (My, he’s been busy!)
This has nothing to do with the blog, but he was also the LA Chapter President of the ACLU. And as a college student he was active in MECha, the Chicano movement to take back the Southwest for Mexico. Don’t you just love this guy?
On July 3rd, Villaraigosa came clean about the affair in a news conference. Maybe “came clean” isn’t the right term after you read what he said.
“I take full responsibility for my actions.” (That’s good. To me that would mean severing his relationship with the reporter, attempting to reconcile with his wife, and getting some counseling.)
Then he said: “I don’t believe that the details of my personal life are relement …(did he mean “relevant” or “are element”? Or did he have a Bush moment?)… to my job as mayor.”
He goes on to explain that most of us base our trust on “whether or not you keep your promises.” (Well, there was that promise he made at the altar to the woman in white. Is that one of the promises he’s talking about? I suppose not. Promises he makes to politicians are much more important.)
As for the reporter, Mirthala Salinas, she said: “I am confident that when all the facts are analyzed, it will be clear that I conducted myself in an appropriate way.” (The only way that is true is if she was also married to him before the relationship began and didn’t know he was still married.)
One last tidbit from this circus; Tony has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President and is the national co-chairman for her campaign committee. It will be interesting to see if his brownness trumps his infidelity. We know Hillary is a veteran victim of marital affairs; we’re just not sure what her position is on adultery. My guess is that he stays because politics always came first for her and Bill. They stayed together for the good of the country (gag).
Tony’s not the first adulterer from either party, nor will he be the last. It always surprises me just how matter-of-fact they are about such things. More surprising is our tolerance for such scoundrels.
I suppose culturally I’m looking through the WASP lens. Maybe we ought cut him some slack for his machismo because he is of Mexican descent. (Is that a lib answer?)
There is another wrinkle to the divorce. You see, Tony’s last name used to be Villar. He changed it in 1988 after he married Corina Raigosa. (How progressive of him. Now, do the feminists praise him for helping Salinas explore and liberate her sexuality or condemn him for cheating on his wife? Ah, the dilemmas of liberalism.)
So, does he change his name after the divorce? What do you think? Any suggestions?
The trouble is that the mayor is married to someone else and has two children from his wife and two adult children from other “relationships”. (My, he’s been busy!)
This has nothing to do with the blog, but he was also the LA Chapter President of the ACLU. And as a college student he was active in MECha, the Chicano movement to take back the Southwest for Mexico. Don’t you just love this guy?
On July 3rd, Villaraigosa came clean about the affair in a news conference. Maybe “came clean” isn’t the right term after you read what he said.
“I take full responsibility for my actions.” (That’s good. To me that would mean severing his relationship with the reporter, attempting to reconcile with his wife, and getting some counseling.)
Then he said: “I don’t believe that the details of my personal life are relement …(did he mean “relevant” or “are element”? Or did he have a Bush moment?)… to my job as mayor.”
He goes on to explain that most of us base our trust on “whether or not you keep your promises.” (Well, there was that promise he made at the altar to the woman in white. Is that one of the promises he’s talking about? I suppose not. Promises he makes to politicians are much more important.)
As for the reporter, Mirthala Salinas, she said: “I am confident that when all the facts are analyzed, it will be clear that I conducted myself in an appropriate way.” (The only way that is true is if she was also married to him before the relationship began and didn’t know he was still married.)
One last tidbit from this circus; Tony has endorsed Hillary Clinton for President and is the national co-chairman for her campaign committee. It will be interesting to see if his brownness trumps his infidelity. We know Hillary is a veteran victim of marital affairs; we’re just not sure what her position is on adultery. My guess is that he stays because politics always came first for her and Bill. They stayed together for the good of the country (gag).
Tony’s not the first adulterer from either party, nor will he be the last. It always surprises me just how matter-of-fact they are about such things. More surprising is our tolerance for such scoundrels.
I suppose culturally I’m looking through the WASP lens. Maybe we ought cut him some slack for his machismo because he is of Mexican descent. (Is that a lib answer?)
There is another wrinkle to the divorce. You see, Tony’s last name used to be Villar. He changed it in 1988 after he married Corina Raigosa. (How progressive of him. Now, do the feminists praise him for helping Salinas explore and liberate her sexuality or condemn him for cheating on his wife? Ah, the dilemmas of liberalism.)
So, does he change his name after the divorce? What do you think? Any suggestions?
Thursday, July 5, 2007
Mexico's mad at us
Our failure to pass “comprehensive immigration reform” has made Mexico mad at us. This is bad.
For example, Jorge Bustamente, a UN human rights rep, says: "It means the continuation and probably a worsening of the migrants' vulnerable conditions." (How come we get blamed when they sneak across the border?)
The editor of El Universal newspaper complained that migrants "will continue to be subjected to extraordinary means of discrimination." (Again, are we dragging them across the border?)
La Jornada’s editor warned: "The most powerful country on the planet will have to continue living, for many more months, with the scandalous contradiction between its laws and the real needs of its economy.” (Oh, the compromises we make so we can have cheap spinach.)
And Mexican President Felipe Calderon tells us that the failure in the Senate "worsens illegal migration." (And it doesn’t help him unload his social burdens permanently.)
And Calderon is just as indignant about the fence as Vicente Fox was.
The sad part is that some politicians in America actually listen to these jerks and worry about how they feel about us. Perhaps the thought never enters their heads that we are being taken for a ride here.
For example, Jorge Bustamente, a UN human rights rep, says: "It means the continuation and probably a worsening of the migrants' vulnerable conditions." (How come we get blamed when they sneak across the border?)
The editor of El Universal newspaper complained that migrants "will continue to be subjected to extraordinary means of discrimination." (Again, are we dragging them across the border?)
La Jornada’s editor warned: "The most powerful country on the planet will have to continue living, for many more months, with the scandalous contradiction between its laws and the real needs of its economy.” (Oh, the compromises we make so we can have cheap spinach.)
And Mexican President Felipe Calderon tells us that the failure in the Senate "worsens illegal migration." (And it doesn’t help him unload his social burdens permanently.)
And Calderon is just as indignant about the fence as Vicente Fox was.
The sad part is that some politicians in America actually listen to these jerks and worry about how they feel about us. Perhaps the thought never enters their heads that we are being taken for a ride here.
Homeland Insecurity
I came across a transcript from a Fox News interview between Chris Wallace and Michael Chertoff, Secretary of Homeland Security.
Now, Chertoff has been up on the Hill pushing immigration reform for President Bush for the last several weeks. He has told Congress that his job is impossible without comprehensive reform, including the legalization of 12 million aliens.
So I shouldn’t be surprised to hear more of the same from him last Sunday. But it still bothers me when the man in charge of protecting us from foreigners tells us he’s done all the enforcement he can.
Chertoff said it is really hard to build a fence. He said of the 700 miles in the bill last fall, we’ll finish 140-150 miles this year and have a total of about 370 by the end of 2008. I can only hope they are putting it in strategic places.
He also says that the fence is overrated; that the real way to stop illegals is to go after the employers. Is this the same guy who told NPR on June 8th that we need these workers so the economy won’t fall apart? Yes he is.
He then goes on to say that Homeland Security has done all they can already with the tools they have. “Tools” is code for money, I think. He told Wallace that Congress has failed to give them an enforcement bill and failed to give them a comprehensive bill, so he is doing the best he can with the money he has been given.
For Chertoff, the employee verification process is inadequate. He wants a tamper-proof card. But he doesn’t talk about the employers he’s sent to jail because there aren’t any. Those are Bush supporters and for the most part they have been safe. And this is the same Chertoff that was telling us how effective the current verification program is.
It is a laugh to go to the Homeland Security website and snoop around the press releases over the past couple of years. Chertoff talks about the wonderful US VISIT technology that combines fingerprint matching to passports. But that program doesn’t work.
And it doesn’t speak well of the enforcement of existing laws. We need to be able to prosecute employers and ID thieves with the existing laws. We need the cooperation between Immigration, the IRS, and Social Security so they will share data and go after the criminals.
Chertoff cannot truthfully say he is doing all he can when hundreds of illegal aliens are in custody in local jails for serious offenses and they are let go because Immigration won’t pick them up. Surely he knows that 12 people a day are murdered at the hands of illegals and another dozen die daily in DUI traffic accidents.
If Chertoff really believes his own words it would be a good time to be vocal about his needs and force the Congress and the administration to fund and execute enforcement. If Chertoff had been as visible and vocal about HB4437 maybe the Senate would have taken it seriously.
You can’t have it both ways, Mike. The truth is that Chertoff has said whatever Bush wanted him to say. Chertoff paints the “victim” picture well when he says he’ll enforce the law but he’s gonna have to deport some parents along the way and leave behind crying children.
So, maybe if we want strong deterrence, Chertoff is not our man. Neither is Bush. Tom Ridge felt the same way about illegals. Like I said in my blog yesterday, this administration is withholding enforcement as a bargaining chip for legalization.
Now, Chertoff has been up on the Hill pushing immigration reform for President Bush for the last several weeks. He has told Congress that his job is impossible without comprehensive reform, including the legalization of 12 million aliens.
So I shouldn’t be surprised to hear more of the same from him last Sunday. But it still bothers me when the man in charge of protecting us from foreigners tells us he’s done all the enforcement he can.
Chertoff said it is really hard to build a fence. He said of the 700 miles in the bill last fall, we’ll finish 140-150 miles this year and have a total of about 370 by the end of 2008. I can only hope they are putting it in strategic places.
He also says that the fence is overrated; that the real way to stop illegals is to go after the employers. Is this the same guy who told NPR on June 8th that we need these workers so the economy won’t fall apart? Yes he is.
He then goes on to say that Homeland Security has done all they can already with the tools they have. “Tools” is code for money, I think. He told Wallace that Congress has failed to give them an enforcement bill and failed to give them a comprehensive bill, so he is doing the best he can with the money he has been given.
For Chertoff, the employee verification process is inadequate. He wants a tamper-proof card. But he doesn’t talk about the employers he’s sent to jail because there aren’t any. Those are Bush supporters and for the most part they have been safe. And this is the same Chertoff that was telling us how effective the current verification program is.
It is a laugh to go to the Homeland Security website and snoop around the press releases over the past couple of years. Chertoff talks about the wonderful US VISIT technology that combines fingerprint matching to passports. But that program doesn’t work.
And it doesn’t speak well of the enforcement of existing laws. We need to be able to prosecute employers and ID thieves with the existing laws. We need the cooperation between Immigration, the IRS, and Social Security so they will share data and go after the criminals.
Chertoff cannot truthfully say he is doing all he can when hundreds of illegal aliens are in custody in local jails for serious offenses and they are let go because Immigration won’t pick them up. Surely he knows that 12 people a day are murdered at the hands of illegals and another dozen die daily in DUI traffic accidents.
If Chertoff really believes his own words it would be a good time to be vocal about his needs and force the Congress and the administration to fund and execute enforcement. If Chertoff had been as visible and vocal about HB4437 maybe the Senate would have taken it seriously.
You can’t have it both ways, Mike. The truth is that Chertoff has said whatever Bush wanted him to say. Chertoff paints the “victim” picture well when he says he’ll enforce the law but he’s gonna have to deport some parents along the way and leave behind crying children.
So, maybe if we want strong deterrence, Chertoff is not our man. Neither is Bush. Tom Ridge felt the same way about illegals. Like I said in my blog yesterday, this administration is withholding enforcement as a bargaining chip for legalization.
Wednesday, July 4, 2007
The Fright of the Phoenix
I am pleased that the Senate failed to get enough votes for the immigration reform bill on June 28th. It did my heart good to see a photo of Harry Reid and Ted Kennedy all glum over the defeat.
But I thought this thing was dead last time and they brought it to life again. Like the mythical bird, it rose from the ashes.
We have seen some pretty desperate measures to try to pass this thing; from secret committees to procedural shenanigans. And we know this is the centerpiece of the Bush domestic agenda.
Soooooo…keep an eye on our friends is Washington. They just might try again. And what worries me is that we know these fellows are not above bribing their colleagues with a highway or a bridge or a pet project of some sort.
Sleep with one eye open.
On the other hand, this is a great question for any candidate. It’s a great issue for smokin’ out the RINOs.
But I thought this thing was dead last time and they brought it to life again. Like the mythical bird, it rose from the ashes.
We have seen some pretty desperate measures to try to pass this thing; from secret committees to procedural shenanigans. And we know this is the centerpiece of the Bush domestic agenda.
Soooooo…keep an eye on our friends is Washington. They just might try again. And what worries me is that we know these fellows are not above bribing their colleagues with a highway or a bridge or a pet project of some sort.
Sleep with one eye open.
On the other hand, this is a great question for any candidate. It’s a great issue for smokin’ out the RINOs.
What now?
I’ve been out of the country for a week (Utah) and always find the news coverage interesting. Utah is a red state, yet Salt Lake City is liberal hog heaven. Despite the Republican bent in the Beehive State they have a strong compassionate streak, sometimes to their detriment. They say that if a con man can’t make it in Utah, he needs to find another line of work.
At any rate, when the immigration reform bill went down in flames in the Senate last week, there was a front page, above the fold, article in The Salt Lake Tribune with the title, “Immigration: What now?” The author, Jennifer Sanchez, lamented the failure of the bill and talked about some of the state and local efforts that probably will proliferate because the feds failed to act.
My first answer to the question, “What now?” was the logical, “How about enforcing the laws we already have?” followed by, “Give Homeland Security the money to do the job.”
One thing this immigration debate has exposed is the lack of enforcement in the past. Last fall Bush signed the border fence bill, but very little has actually been done due to lack of funding (well, lack of political will to do it, really) and so our “leaders” dangled a $4.4 billion promise for fence money if the Senate would pass the bill.
And Bush also talked about doubling the number of detention beds right away.
So, my question is, Why haven’t they been doing this already? We’ve had ample signs that things were out of control. Why didn’t Congress and the President respond to the need?
This most recent debate explains it all; they wanted to bargain with us. Bush and the Senate came to us and said, “Look, we’ll step up enforcement with the fence, detention beds, employer sanctions, better ID…IF…you’ll let us legalize the illegals.”
But enough Americans were smart enough to say, “You were supposed to be doing all those things anyway. That’s the law. Do you job!” But I have zero confidence that things will change as a result of this debate. Bush is our chief executive and I don’t see him getting significantly tougher with the illegals who are here. In fact, if he’s given up hope of passing a bill, he may back off from his flurry of enforcement activity.
And with Mike Chertoff at the helm in Homeland Security we really don’t have much hope that he will be more vigorous. After all, he was chief lobbyist for the White House during these debates. We know he’s an “amnesty” man; not a “rule of law” type.
As for state and local effort, those who were waiting to see what Congress was going to do will now have to get busy. I do hope the courts will cooperate.
At any rate, when the immigration reform bill went down in flames in the Senate last week, there was a front page, above the fold, article in The Salt Lake Tribune with the title, “Immigration: What now?” The author, Jennifer Sanchez, lamented the failure of the bill and talked about some of the state and local efforts that probably will proliferate because the feds failed to act.
My first answer to the question, “What now?” was the logical, “How about enforcing the laws we already have?” followed by, “Give Homeland Security the money to do the job.”
One thing this immigration debate has exposed is the lack of enforcement in the past. Last fall Bush signed the border fence bill, but very little has actually been done due to lack of funding (well, lack of political will to do it, really) and so our “leaders” dangled a $4.4 billion promise for fence money if the Senate would pass the bill.
And Bush also talked about doubling the number of detention beds right away.
So, my question is, Why haven’t they been doing this already? We’ve had ample signs that things were out of control. Why didn’t Congress and the President respond to the need?
This most recent debate explains it all; they wanted to bargain with us. Bush and the Senate came to us and said, “Look, we’ll step up enforcement with the fence, detention beds, employer sanctions, better ID…IF…you’ll let us legalize the illegals.”
But enough Americans were smart enough to say, “You were supposed to be doing all those things anyway. That’s the law. Do you job!” But I have zero confidence that things will change as a result of this debate. Bush is our chief executive and I don’t see him getting significantly tougher with the illegals who are here. In fact, if he’s given up hope of passing a bill, he may back off from his flurry of enforcement activity.
And with Mike Chertoff at the helm in Homeland Security we really don’t have much hope that he will be more vigorous. After all, he was chief lobbyist for the White House during these debates. We know he’s an “amnesty” man; not a “rule of law” type.
As for state and local effort, those who were waiting to see what Congress was going to do will now have to get busy. I do hope the courts will cooperate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)