House Dems Oppose Licenses for Illegals

Discussion in 'Politics' started by red states rule, Nov 9, 2007.

  1. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    It would seem Hillary, Reid, and Pelosi have problems within their ranks over giving illegals drivers licenses.

    They must have seen the polls where 70% oppose this insane idea


    Democrats hit licenses for illegals
    By Stephen Dinan and S.A. Miller

    Democratic House members can't understand why their party's national leaders are embracing driver's licenses for illegal aliens, and say their constituents see it as a "de facto amnesty."

    Rep. Nancy Boyda, Kansas Democrat, said the stance taken by her party's presidential candidates is very unpopular in her district.

    "What I tell people back home is, 'It is not my day to watch them,' " said Mrs. Boyda, adding that her reputation as a political maverick and staunch opponent of illegal entry distinguishes her from the folly at the top of the ticket.

    "It is ultimately about the rule of law," she said. "We don't give driver's licenses to people who are here illegally. We do something about the fact that they are here illegally."

    Rep. Artur Davis, Alabama Democrat, said voters in his state "get that a driver's license is a form of legal status" because it can be used to board a plane, enter most government buildings and conduct most financial transactions.

    "The American people don't want conferring driver's licenses to become a de facto amnesty," he said.

    The issue was brought into focus by New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, a Democrat, who in September proposed granting state driver's licenses to illegal aliens as long as they can produce a valid foreign passport.

    Last week, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton faltered when asked about the issue in a presidential debate by being unable to say whether she supported Mr. Spitzer's proposal. This week, she said she supports it for some states.

    for the complete article

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071109/NATION/111090089/1001
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. actsnoblemartin
    Offline

    actsnoblemartin I love Andrea & April

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,039
    Thanks Received:
    407
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    La Mesa, CA
    Ratings:
    +407
    Exactly, I couldnt agree with you more

     
  3. red states rule
    Offline

    red states rule Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    16,011
    Thanks Received:
    571
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +572
    Ayt least a few Dems have an IQ above room temp
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Nevadamedic
    Offline

    Nevadamedic Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,439
    Thanks Received:
    178
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Diagon Alley
    Ratings:
    +178
    Are you a member of Numbers USA?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. mattskramer
    Offline

    mattskramer Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    5,852
    Thanks Received:
    359
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +359
    I grant you that it seems to me that the Democrats are more likely to base their opinions on the opinions of the public than are Republicans. That leads me to a puzzling ethical question. Are you to follow the wishes of your constituents or hold fast to your own values? Suppose that you win an election to an executive office. Once there, you make an executive decision. After time, your constituents (the people that you represent) think that you should change your position. Some people think that the leader should change as the views of his voters change. Some people think that a leader should never change his mind. I suppose that such an issue belongs in a different thread. At any rate, for good or bad, it does seem like Democrats are more swayed by polls than are Republicans.

    When a politician is asked: “Do you support giving drivers licenses to illegal immigrants?” Should a politician say: Should a politician say: “I don’t care what people think. I’m opposed to it.” Or “I don’t care what people think. I support it”? Or would it be nice to have a politician say: “I am not sure. I will ask people to tell me what they want. I will listen to them. Then I will decide”.

    To suggest that a politician should immediately give a straight answer and keep to that answer once elected makes sending letters and calls to said leader somewhat futile, doesn’t it?

    “Gee. Thanks for all those letters you sent voicing your opposition to my recent actions, but as I said in my campaign. I will do this action and continue to do it, no matter what you say.
     

Share This Page