He went to bed with Senator Kennedy, and now people have noticed he got up with fleas.

Like many others I have lost ALL confidence in the integrity of the legislative AND EXECUTIVE BRANCHES.
We are told how impossible it is to remove 12 million illegals, and that is an excuse for not sealing the border. [Seems a bit of a non sequiter.]

Granting that we cannot remove all 12 million, we can and MUST seal the border first, so that when and if we manage to assimilate this group, there will not be another 20 million new illegals here to take their turn. I refer you to the 1986 immigration reform , and its failure to prevent THIS cycle.

Kyl and his cohorts do not understand what those of us living outside of gated communities are seeing clearly.If he does not want to listen -and he has not- then his past record will not save him from being replaced.

And yes, ST, the Democrats may pass something much worse in a year or two. If so, let them do it without any Republican aid or cover, and they can bear the brunt of the backlash. Kyl, by helping Kennedy , has become merely a “useful idiot” on this issue.

Gray One

‘

Ward Connerly thinks they will.

The heart of the issue:

Legalized Hispanic immigrants, Connerly says, would also gain privileges over immigrants from nations such as Russia because they would be part of an officially sanctioned “underrepresented minority.”

…

The problem, according to Connerly, lies in “the nexus between illegal immigration and preferences.” That issue had not been part of the immigration debate until last Friday, when Connerly published an open letter in the Washington Times, signed by various individuals, some of whom disagree with him on immigration policy per se. Signatories include Grover Norquist, Linda Chavez, and civil-rights advocate Joe Hicks.

“This is one of those things that people have not thought through.” Connerly said. “A group that has never had the historic discrimination of blacks would be given the status of an underrepresented minority in this country.”

Interesting perspective. Those who support the bill, what say you? I’d be interested in hearing the other side.

We can and should do both: border enforcement and reform the existing immigration system.

Agreed. Where I part company with the advocates of the current measure is the coupling of the two. I don’t accept the premise that we must tackle both issues at once, and do them now. I’ve yet to hear a good argument as to why we can’t improve border security now, and once that’s done, work on reforming the immigration laws.

The fact is that the provisions for border control in Simpson-Mazzoli have not been enforced. That absolutely must be done first, along with a new law requiring immediate deporting of any illegal who commits a felony. One strike, you’re out.

And the border enforcement must have some real teeth in it. Someone’s pointed out that a 700-mile fence has been authorized, but only TWO miles of it have been funded and built. That does NOT qualify as real enforcement.

I do think that one reason the discussion of this topic has generated a lot more heat than light is that people are realizing that the problem gets worse every day. There’s a tendency to drop reasoned discourse and start shouting when you see things falling apart in front of you. That’s why the first step – before anything else – must be border control. If that’s done, the remaining issues can be considered in a calmer atmosphere.

Both parties want to make the claim that they’ve ‘done something’ about illegal immigration before next year’s elections, so we’re going to get a bill one way or the other.

I’m not sure I agree there, ST. Both parties know that pushing a transparently bad bill through in the face of massive public disapproval will hand their opponents – whether Democrat or Republican – a useful club for hammering them in the 2008 campaign. Being concerned with re-election before almost anything else, they’ll back away as long as public ire over the topic keeps the issue on the front burner.

That doesn’t mean some politicians, those in safe districts, won’t try. Teddy Kennedy knows he could offer a bill requiring mandatory child sacrifice to Gaia and he’d still be re-elected comfortably, so he will continue to push for it.

More likely, I’d expect a serious renewed push for an amnesty bill early in 2009 – when the people will have more than two years to forget about it before they next go to the polls.

In fairness, not all of the counties are getting buried with the illegal invasion. Some need to do more than others.

Let’s say we use an average of each county employing X number of employees using just one of there brand new prisoner transport vans and or busses from the prisoner transport pool, fill it up and transfer them to deportation depots. One bus, one driver and ten criminals, done once a day, every day for thirty days. That’s 942,300 illegal aliens off the street. After one year, that’s 11,307,600 illegal aliens off the street! If only 10% of them were criminals involved in violent crimes and drugs, we would have gotten 113,076 hardened criminals OFF THE STREETS! Clearly an over simplification and impossible, as those busses drowned in NO are proof of what can’t be done.

Now before y’all go ballistic, I agree that the current system is in need of serious overhaul, as are any number of federally run agencies and bureaucracy’s. All one needs to see and see clearly, are the individuals drawing pay, where incentive to do the work as it was intended to performed, pales in comparison to morally challenged individuals working the system for their own advantage. Perhaps that seems off topic, but until you have responsible people doing the jobs as they were intended to be accomplished, no amount of reformation will ever be adequate. They will always find a way around the initial purpose and intent to serve their various *demons*!

Political, economic, and cultural liberalism have swept over the United States in the last century and this is another symptom of that fact.

First things first! SEAL THE BORDER or sink, while the bantering gets sorted out! There are too many things at stake NOT to make the border de facto secure and arresting those guarding it for shooting a drug running criminal just adds to the insanity.

Here’s another post worth reading as it relates to the Z-Visa.

I have a neighbor who is a knee jerk redneck conservative and all he shows is that he is heartless, without care, no facts and full of bluster.

The commenter’s on Hugh’s article who do this are not persuasive and are part of the problem and not the solution.

Thank you ST for running such a WONDERFUL blog. You are the best and most welcoming blog I know for thoughtful conservatives.

I agree with Lorica’s 5:54 post.

Also, the characterization that we want 12 million rounded up and deported is kind of misunderstanding our position and belief that there won’t be 12 million to round up when the border security is tightened and laws enforced.

If employers weren’t employing them and as Michelle Malkin’s site has daily now it seems story after story of illegal aliens killing Americans after drunk driving yet being criminals already for previous violations including previously drunk driving – we are failing to provide basic security for America not even National security because we are failing as a nation to tighten the border and enforce our laws that we already have.

Our situation is born of negligence. We need to stop allowing for negligence and then make improvements that do not include Z visa’s. The reason the “shamnesty” (as MM calls it) bill is bad is because of Z visa’s. There have been debates on Hugh Hewitt’s program where the people on Lorica and our side have described in detail the problem with the Z visa and why it single handedly makes the bill bad and then other provisions in the bill add up to double-bad.

Yes, there are good things in the bill like added money for border security but double-bad with delayed or not actually done (as in previous bills like the 700 mile fence not doing) makes the bill …. double-bad.

In my humble opinion though. Thanks for listening ST.

And as far as the bit about the accusation the President made about bill opponents ‘not wanting to do what’s right for America’, isn’t that exactly what many opponents have been saying for the last several years about the president’s stance on illegal immigration?