Shamnesty to Rear Its Ugly Head Later This Year
Posted in Terrorism, wordpress, McCain, Immigration, Tancredo, Kennedy, Kyl, Specter, United States, Law, Justice, obama, Pelosi, Reid, Border Control, Legislation, Mitch McConnell, lugar, Blogs4Borders, boehner on May 30th, 2009 by Stanford MatthewsAs early as June 8, 2009 a formal restart of the shamnesty movement will occur in the Obama White House. At least one report confirms what most of us already knew. Shamnesty will once again be the top issue in Washington later in 2009. But you had better get your opposition strategy activated long before then as it may only be a matter of 60 liberal votes along with any mindless RINOs that decides the issue if pressure is not applied starting now. 2010 is not far off and we all know politicians like only one thing better than getting elected. That is getting re-elected. And a vote for shamnesty is just one more reason to throw the bums out.
The Dream Act has been around for a while and like the shamnesty defeat in the summer of 2007 it has been shot down once. Together with yes votes on bailouts any member of Congress voting for shamnesty risks defeat in 2010 unless they are secure in a liberal saturated district willing to open all borders and ignore the rule of law.
All the Dream Act does is give illegals one more reason to violate the law and enter this country without lawfully engaging the process. Rather than offer an unnecessary carrot to break the law, Congress should encourage and assist the executive branch or law enforcement with the stick they need to eliminate illegal immigration. This is not a call to abolish immigration but illegal immigration. There is a big difference. But liberals for open borders and unregulated immigration prefer to label those opposed to illegal immigration as xenophobic. Yes, there is no shortage of liberal labels to muddy the water on issues.
So far it is no surprise that Arlen Specter, RINO extraordinaire and now GOP defector, will support whatever the Democrats propose. Other notable RINO looking Senators are Lugar, Lott and Wicker.
It will be tougher this time than the last to defeat shamnesty. But that is not reason for concern but increased effort and attitude.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Based on the report below and Senator Kyl’s record during the shamnesty votes of 2007 little confidence is found in his statements or assessment. For the same reasons Senator DeMint instills more confidence than the former. These are truly defining moments for the GOP and perhaps the DNC as well. By the end of the first 100 days of the Obama Administration, a typical early measure of US Presidents, one party or the other will have the upper hand. The Democratic party majority in Congress and a Democrat in the White House do not make it a foregone conclusion.
The party’s second-ranking Senate member, Jon Kyl of Arizona, told U.S. television Fox News Sunday the legislation needs to be reconstructed. Kyl and other Republicans say the estimated $820-billion bill wastes money on programs that will not stimulate the economy. They are calling for more tax cuts and infrastructure building.
It has been noted here more than once that Senator John McCain can be honored and respected for service to country. But that fact alone does not provide a pass on other topics related to a Presidential campaign. As the story title indicates below, McCain likes being known as a maverick. And he wants us to believe he never supported amnesty for illegals.
In the Senate No Amnesty Scorecard post series this is the fourth of six planned posts. The first post describes the best the Senate has to offer. Twenty-three senators including four Dems and an Independent voted consistently against amnesty. The first runners up list features seven Republicans and four Democrats who voted essentially to debate each bill but likely realized debate controlled by Sinister Harry Reid is no debate at all. Their no votes on the subsequent cloture for each bill defeated amnesty on both measures. The 2nd runners up have votes that assisted the defeat of both amnesty measures yet their intentions are still unclear. Now a quick review of the bills and on to the first list of dishonorable mention. While not the worst list, it is the first of three bad lists of Senators no one needs.
The first list of dishonorable mention features Sinister Harry Reid. You might expect him to be on the worst list but his votes earn him only the first dishonorable mention. He is accompanied by other senators prominent in the amnesty fight and they always end up on the wrong side of the argument. They are in no particular order, Senators Graham, Kyl and Specter. Specter was intent on amnesty last year while a GOP majority was in place. Kyl is credited with getting the first back room deal of this year going. And Senator Graham believes the American people are really stupid the way he continues to claim amnesty is good for us. Bayh and Lugar have been sited in articles and reports as the two Senators from Indiana who are ‘out of touch’. No kidding. With eight Dems out of 19 senators on this list and the actions of the GOP counterparts, it is obvious we’re talking RINOs here. So here’s the list.
There votes were either in favor of one amnesty bill or the other. They cannot claim they didn’t know this was amnesty. By choosing one amnesty bill or the other they only indicate a preference for one of two bad bills. Maybe they had ‘pet’ amendments connected to one or the other. They likewise cannot claim one bill was not amnesty while the other was for, of course, both bills featured amnesty. About all they can claim is in their dark pursuit for amnesty they were fussy about other details of the flawed bills and were greedy for more perks with amnesty. They should also be ashamed of their amnesty efforts beyond the floor activity on these two bills.
This is an open trackback linkfest. The Secure the Borders theme is held over another day. We have no reason to think it is necessary to provide any disclaimers, warranties, discounts or warnings. If you have any suggestions, criticisms, questions or just feel the need to communicate, trackback or let us know in the comments. Please donate a minute of your time for the QotD, you can answer the question of the day in the comments section.
We all know that political matters can rarely be taken at face value. The saga developing over S. 1348, a so-called bipartisan compromise bill claimed to be immigration reform, is proving to be the evidence that the White House and Congress are incapable of abandoning special interest or ignoring election politics. This senate bill is more accurately characterized the amnesty bill as those referred to as the ‘architects’ (Kyl, Graham, Kennedy and McCain) all seem to favor amnesty.
His complaints were echoed by La Raza and other special interest advocates. The remainder of the story repeated the typical rhetoric by both sides of the story. The last point to mention from the article is the 8 to 13 year waiting period for Zcard citizenship is the Achilles heel of the plan for illegal advocacy. The Zcard amnesty makes the illegal into legal immediately. But the waiting period does not begin until the border is secure and the ‘high tech’ employer verification system is completed. And we know what the chances are of that. So this plan truly is amnesty because illegal aliens will be made legal immediately and the required waiting period for citizenship may never start.
The extreme peaceniks and others expressing less venomous opposition to the Iraq war often begin their arguments with reference to inherent characteristics of war as their central theme. Aside from the obvious death and destruction that accompanies armed conflict, they stress the loss of troops and civilians as their largest concern. But they will never accept the fact that this same expression of opposition has prolonged the war in Iraq by strengthening the determination of the enemy. In other words, opposition prolonging the war shares responsibility for the death toll that the anti-war crowd views with such disdain. How’s that for irony?
It may sound outragious to the casual observer or typical apathetic or bleeding heart version of American, but the laws against treason should have a section that addresses politicians who sell this country by accepting money from every special interest and who do their bidding regardless of the negative impact on this nation.
