For all to see: The Kennedy -McCain Immigration Bill

What a blast from the past - and to think Juan probably still thinks his McKennedy amnesty bill was the bestest thing ever, if it weren't for those damned nativists that he had to promise to "close the border" first for. He won't.

Hillary Klinton is another La Raza shill, worse even, and Barack Hussein Obama wants to go a step further and give them all dls. This bill will be back, in the first off-election year.:sad:
 
There seems to be confusion that this bill is nothing more than an amnesty declaration. I challenge anyone to actually read it and then prove on evidence that it is that. I would like evryone to note Title I of this bill pertaining to security.


http://www.shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.1033:

It might help if the right Senate bill was there: S1639.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:S.1639:

Most of the problems came from Section IV, particularly Z visas and the Dream Act.
 
That wasn't the McCain bill. That one was a Kennedy-Spector bill. I posted the correct bill. Look at the sponsors.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:SN01639:@@@P

Misdirection deflected.

The second was in response to the first, after IT failed. Then the second, it too failed. McCain was side by side with Kennedy, pushing the Kennedy bill, including Z visas. He kept pushing until he realized that he, 'had to learn that lesson.' I don't buy it. He's better than either Democrat so I'll probably vote for him, but on immigration they are all the same.
 
Interesting, seems the administration may be trying to help McCain:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080401/ap_on_go_ot/border_fence

Rules to be waived for border fence

By EILEEN SULLIVAN, Associated Press Writer 47 minutes ago

The Bush administration plans to use its authority to bypass more than 30 laws and regulations in an effort to finish building 670 miles of fence along the southwest U.S. border by the end of this year, federal officials said Tuesday.

Invoking the two legal waivers — which Congress authorized — would cut through bureaucratic red tape and sidestep environmental laws that currently stand in the way of the Homeland Security Department building 267 miles of fencing in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas, according to officials familiar with the plan. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the waivers had not yet been announced.

The move would be the biggest use of legal waivers since the administration started building the fence, and it would cover a total of 470 miles along the Southwest border. Previously, the department has used its waiver authority for two portions of fence in Arizona and one portion in San Diego.

As of March 17, there were 309 miles of fencing in place, leaving 361 to be completed by the end of the year to meet the department's goal. Of those, 267 miles are being held up by federal, state and local laws and regulations, the officials said.

One waiver would address the construction of a 22-mile levee barrier in Hidalgo County, Texas. The other waiver would cover 30 miles of fencing and technology deployment on environmentally sensitive ground in San Diego, southern Arizona and the Rio Grande; and 215 miles in California, Arizona and Texas that face other legal impediments due to administrative processes. For instance, building in some areas requires assessments and studies that — if conducted — could not be completed in time to finish the fence by the end of the year.

....
 
The second was in response to the first, after IT failed. Then the second, it too failed. McCain was side by side with Kennedy, pushing the Kennedy bill, including Z visas. He kept pushing until he realized that he, 'had to learn that lesson.' I don't buy it. He's better than either Democrat so I'll probably vote for him, but on immigration they are all the same.

Yet his name is nowhere to be found on the bill. Just because you said it, doesn't make it true.
 
There seems to be confusion that this bill is nothing more than an amnesty declaration. I challenge anyone to actually read it and then prove on evidence that it is that. I would like evryone to note Title I of this bill pertaining to security.


http://www.shusterman.com/cgi-bin/ex-link.pl?thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.1033:

Too many people looked at the broken promises to secure the border as we grant citizenship to some illegals. Think of the Reagan Amnesty Plan. I personally didn't think the bill was that bad (and I am an immigration conservative), but I do think any bill must start with a comprehensive closure of the border starting with a fence, harsh, swift and enforable punishment of employers and landlords and then move toward possible amnesty.
 
Too many people looked at the broken promises to secure the border as we grant citizenship to some illegals. Think of the Reagan Amnesty Plan. I personally didn't think the bill was that bad (and I am an immigration conservative), but I do think any bill must start with a comprehensive closure of the border starting with a fence, harsh, swift and enforable punishment of employers and landlords and then move toward possible amnesty.

The plan for securing the border first. If the bill had passed, that would have happened first, per the plan.
 
I'm sorry, I won't be bothering you again.

I wasn't bitching about your response. I was bitchng about the lack of response. Everyone on this board seems to have an opinion on the bill, but when the bill is put in front of them, they clam up. Sorry if I offended.
 
Onthefence, I have an article that pretty much sums up the way I feel about this bill.

http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2006/04/11/mccain-epitomizes-federal-government-failures/

(snip)

McCain/Kennedy has two purposes, neither of which is to strengthen the borders or enhance the security of the United States. Instead, it first is intended to garner the gratitude of invading hordes of illegal aliens, thus guaranteeing their loyalty and servitude to Washington in perpetuity. Secondly, it is structured in such a manner as to hopefully allow supporting Senators from both parties to camouflage this latest abdication of their Constitutional duty under the auspices of "reform."

John McCain, Ted Kennedy, and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the bill's loudest advocates, are busily traversing the TV roundtable and morning news program circuit in an aggressive effort to make their case "airtight." Yet even a cursory analysis of their words reveals their bill as a dangerous step in entirely the wrong direction.

Consider their monotonously repeated mantra that this bill is "not amnesty." In justification, they explain that illegals will ostensibly be required to pay a thousand dollar fine. Yet even a single visit to the emergency room can cost much more than that. So in truth, the "fine" represents the shallowest example of symbolism.

Secondly, they insist that the illegals presently in the country will be sent to the "back of the line" in their efforts to attain citizenship. But what does this really mean? Clearly, the illegals would have no less freedom to move about and conduct their lives than they presently possess. Tell that to the poor refugee languishing at the "front" of the line in some third-world country, waiting for entry into the United States.

Nor would their status as "non-citizens" prevent them from participation in the political process. The massive demonstrations of the last few weeks, and the intimidating effect they clearly had on the Senate, inarguably prove as much.

Like campaign finance "reform" legislation, which McCain ramrodded through the Congress in perhaps his most famous crusade, immigration "reform" does not address any aspect of the current crisis in a manner that would alleviate the concerns of average citizens who see their country being stolen from them. Rather, it gives Washington insiders an opportunity to appear engaged and responsive, while guaranteeing that absolutely nothing of substance is accomplished.
 
You are like a child who can't stand it when proved wrong.

and you sir are like too many McCain supporters, you will drive those away that felt they needed to vote for the best of the three standing. You have proven nothing, you indeed have posted what is well known, but statements made by McCain himself that he supported Kennedy's bill.

More to the point, you are reminding many of why they felt they could not vote for McCain, thanks for that:

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/w...2/28/kennedy_mccain_try_again_on_immigration/

Kennedy, McCain try again on immigration
Bill would keep fence, but ease way to citizenship

By Rick Klein, Globe Staff | February 28, 2007

WASHINGTON -- Senators Edward M. Kennedy and John McCain are set to introduce a revised version of their sweeping plan to overhaul the nation's immigration laws, in a bill that's likely to restart a tense debate in Congress.

The measure, which is being drafted in consultation with the White House, will largely mirror the immigration bill that stalled last year, according to lawmakers and aides involved in the process. That measure was blocked primarily because House Republican leaders were adamantly opposed to provisions that would have allowed undocumented immigrants to become US citizens.

Though negotiations are still ongoing, this year's bill will most likely leave in place the 700-mile border fence, the creation of which was signed into law last year. It would also double the size of the US Border Patrol and add new means to crack down on employers who hire undocumented immigrants, a further attempt to assuage concerns about the nation's porous borders.

...

McCain, Bush, and Spector met with Democratic leaders that also wanted this and came up with S1348, (5/07) which later was changed to 1639, (6/07). McCain pushed for both, which in effect were just rehashes of the one you first cited, then each also failed. By May, McCain was already feeling the reaction and contemplating his run for Presidency. I never said he was stupid, just not Conservative. About a month ago, I had decided that there really wasn't an alternative, I'd have to vote for him. You have come very close to influencing me to change my mind.

If he in your sit down with him or any of his campaign staff has encouraged your discussions in this way, well then he's not as bright as I gave him credit for being. McCain has never denied what he did, in fact he says he learned from the backlash. I must say I was never convinced of that. On the other hand, such a 'McCain backer,' trying to spin that since he's not a co-sponsor and did not vote on that last bill, well that's so much crap.
 
I think immigration is the most grossly overblown issue in the history of American Politics. It primarily affects states near the Mexican border, yet in my state of Missouri, our moron Gov. Matt Blunt-Trauma feels the need to "crack down" on "illegal immigrants". It's just not as big of a deal as the far right would have us believe. Of course, the primary exploiters of illegals are the corporations that fund right-wing campaigns.
An example of the real victims of these "crack-downs" - children who were brought here illegally by their parents, who have spent nearly their entire lives here, who are here through absolutely no fault of their own, are also send back "home". What good does this do?
 
I think immigration is the most grossly overblown issue in the history of American Politics. It primarily affects states near the Mexican border, yet in my state of Missouri, our moron Gov. Matt Blunt-Trauma feels the need to "crack down" on "illegal immigrants". It's just not as big of a deal as the far right would have us believe. Of course, the primary exploiters of illegals are the corporations that fund right-wing campaigns.
An example of the real victims of these "crack-downs" - children who were brought here illegally by their parents, who have spent nearly their entire lives here, who are here through absolutely no fault of their own, are also send back "home". What good does this do?

Using 1996 data, way off in numbers as we now know, here are the government's estimates, seems you are a bit off on only the 'border states':

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cach...gov&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Top 10 States with undocumented residents:

1. California 2,000,000
2. Texas 700,000
3. New York 540,000
4. Florida 350,000
5. Illinois 290,000
6. New Jersey 135,000

7. Arizona 115,000
8. Massachusetts 85,000
9. Virginia 55,000
10. Washington 52,000
 
Kathianne your numbers prove my point. If you do the math, 2/3 of the undocumented people are in border states (and Florida is a "border" state because of it's proximity to Caribbean islands). The only non-border states with large undocumented populations are New York and Illinois which both have very large cities with very large immigrant populations in general (New York and Chicago) and so are magnets for these folks.

The fact still remains that this issue is blown way out of proportion. The problem isn't the immigrants, it's the corporations who encourage them to come here and then exploit them with the aid and support of the federal government.

acludem
 

Forum List

Back
Top