Here's a way to break illegal immigration

[Bizzarofelice]

And what's up with Bace? Not doing the spellcheck thing anymore?

Savage is easy to avoid.

As for the spellheck thing, I still do it to all you posters whose arguements I can't handle.

No problem.

I know I didn't write that because "arguements" is spelled incorrectly.

[Diogenes]

Really?

I didn't know that. :twisted:

[Bizzarofelice]

Yeah. You've been acting like a tard all these years just to see if I would react.

[Diogenes]

Actually Iv'e been mocking you all these months because you're an idiot.

[Jerkovich]

Actually Iv'e been mocking you all these months because you're an idiot.

:o

[Neely8]

Article Launched: 04/13/2006 12:00:00 AM PDT

Dems at fault in death of immigration reform




WHO killed immigration reform?

The autopsy shows it was Senate Democrats.

It's tempting to put a pox on both parties. But it wouldn't be fair.

Republicans were tireless in search of comprehensive, and bipartisan, reform.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona joined with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., to draft the guest-worker legislation, and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter made that legislation central to what his committee sent to the full Senate.

Sens. Lindsay Graham of South Carolina and Sam Brownback of Kansas were vocal in their support.

Sens. Mel Martinez of Florida and Chuck Hagel of Nebraska offered a helpful compromise.

And Republican Majority Leader Bill Frist showed leadership by reaching out to the other side.

Too bad you can't say the same for Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who was the villain in this drama.

Hector Flores, president of the League of United Latin-American Citizens, told me that he tried to impress upon Reid's office that it was important to get immigration reform done.

"Apparently, it fell on deaf ears," Flores said.

Reid claims it was GOP hard-liners who killed reform by running roughshod over Frist.

Baloney.

The hard-liners had - by all accounts - no more than 30 votes, including those of conservative Democrats.

On the other side, you had - according to McCain - as many as 70 votes.

A deal was at hand that would have offered legal status to some illegal immigrants.

It would have made the GOP seem more Latino-friendly, but it would also have infuriated organized labor, which opposes something that was in the mix: guest workers.

After the Senate Judiciary Committee put out a guest-worker bill, AFL-CIO President John Sweeney issued a statement saying: "Guest-workers programs are a bad idea and harm all workers."

That did it. Senate Democrats sided with labor, and sold out Latinos.

The deal came undone because Reid refused to allow the legislation to go through the amendment process.

Republicans had come up with as many as 400 amendments but whittled the list to20.

Reid agreed to proceed with debate on just three.

It was a masterstroke by Democrats.

Labor is happy. And while Latinos are angry, there's always the chance that Democrats can fool them into channeling that anger toward Republicans.

Remarkably, it's working.

At a protest in Washington Monday, one Latina held up a sign that read: "The GOP is losing my Latino vote."

At another protest in Dallas, someone handed out registration leaflets urging demonstrators to vote Democratic.

Some Latino leaders don't think it'll be that easy.

Cecilia Munoz, vice


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



president of the National Council of La Raza, told me: "I don't believe that it's wise for Democrats to come to our community and ask for votes by saying: `Hey, we kept an immigration bill from going forward.' ... People understand when they're being used."

Even so, it looks like Reid and the Democrats orchestrated the perfect deception. Trouble is, they left fingerprints.

The Washington Post said in an editorial: "Democrats - whether their motive was partisan advantage or legitimate fear of a bad bill emerging from conference with the House - are the ones who refused, in the end, to proceed with debate on amendments, which is, after all, how legislation gets made."

Frank Sharry, the executive director of the liberal National Immigration Forum, said in a statement: "We cannot escape the conclusion that the Democratic Senate leadership was more interested in keeping the immigration issue alive in the run-up to midterms than in enacting immigration reform legislation."

And Sen. Kennedy told The Associated Press: "Politics got ahead of policy on this."

He then refused, according to the article, to defend Reid's performance.

The story noted that, "Outside the Senate, several Democratic strategists concluded that the best politics was to allow the bill to die."

The moral: Marches and Mexican flags don't equal power.

Labor uses millions of dollars in political contributions to take care of Democrats, and so Democrats take care of labor.

After the bill died, Democrats rubbed salt in the wound by insisting that Latinos had no choice but to stay on the liberal hacienda.

Susan Estrich, who served as campaign manager for Michael Dukakis in 1988, told Fox News that Republicans had blown their chance to win Latino votes and predicted that Latino support would help Democrats win both houses of Congress.

You see, in a twist on the famous words of one of their icons, Democrats no longer ask what they can do for Latinos, only what Latinos can do for them.

Thanks DEMS!!!!

[Bizzarofelice]

Thanks DEMS!!!!

Dems agreed to a version and didn't want that version adjusted with amendments/riders. Reps refused so its dead for now.

Dems wanted the version agreed upon, GOP wanted the ability to attach pork projects.

[Neely8]

Thanks DEMS!!!!

Dems agreed to a version and didn't want that version adjusted with amendments/riders. Reps refused so its dead for now.

Dems wanted the version agreed upon, GOP wanted the ability to attach pork projects.

So they agreed to a version but were unwilling to compromise for the good of the american people. Their way or no way at all. Very nice.....

[Risa]

Susan Estrich, who served as campaign manager for Michael Dukakis in 1988, told Fox News that Republicans had blown their chance to win Latino votes and predicted that Latino support would help Democrats win both houses of Congress.

You see, in a twist on the famous words of one of their icons, Democrats no longer ask what they can do for Latinos, only what Latinos can do for them.

Thanks DEMS!!!!

hey, that was in the op/ed today...some dude named navaretto or something.

all i could do was roll my eyes, and think back to that photo with a poster at one of the marches with all the flags -- EXCEPT CUBA


how do Cubans feel to be singled out for 'invisibility', so that the only 'good' Latino is Mexican?

or does it matter, since Cubans vote Republican like old folks scope out lunch buffets at Golden Corrale? therefore, they aren't real Latinos :roll: :roll: :roll:

where's the Cuban voices been in all this?

[Risa]

Thanks DEMS!!!!

Dems agreed to a version and didn't want that version adjusted with amendments/riders. Reps refused so its dead for now.

Dems wanted the version agreed upon, GOP wanted the ability to attach pork projects.

So they agreed to a version but were unwilling to compromise for the good of the american people. Their way or no way at all. Very nice.....

It was a jack move... just not (only) by Democrats. Democrats were just the most vocal in their support of illegal aliens. But a lot of Republicans played the dollar-signs-and-potential-voters-errrrrrrrrrrrrrr-sucking-the-dick-of-businesses-hiring-these-people-over-Americans, too.


It would suck ass if the Democrats, for all their sympathy and empathy and TOTAL BENDING OVER BACKWARDS FOR NON CITIZENS were to get shanked up the ass by those same non-citizens and their supporters.

you know what they say about dogs and fleas, though....