Jun 14 2006

Hastert Fiddles As Party Destructs

Published by at 5:44 am under All General Discussions,Illegal Immigration

Well, one thing everyone agreed was that immigration had to be dealt with and not shelved. The hard liners who cannot tolerate MORE than beefed up border security in the House have decided to make a bad situation worse and ‘learn’ about the Senate Bill:

Hopes for a quick compromise on immigration were dealt a blow Tuesday after House Speaker Dennis Hastert said he wanted to take a “long look” at a Senate bill offering possible citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants.

Hastert said hearings on the Senate bill should be held before appointing anyone to a House-Senate committee to negotiate a compromise immigration bill. Later, he said he was unsure what the House’s next move would be.

“We’re going to take a long look at it,” Hastert said late Tuesday.

House Majority Leader John Boehner agreed. “I think we should know clearly what’s in the Senate bill,” Boehner said. But he added there are lots of ways to understand its contents.

What have these yahoos been doing? They should be all up on the details already. This is not about them learning a thing. This is about ‘educating the public’ who are whole heartedly against the hardline house bill. Well, it was a good run while it lasted, but we all knew there would be a time where the far right would try and jump farther than the country was willing to go and they would pay the price. It is the way of life and the ever swinging pendulum of politics.

There is a solution for those who want a pound of flesh (as opposed to back taxes and better assimilation) which I proposed a while back (here).  Basically it is proposal to deport real criminals who are immigrants, instead of trying to make working for a living a felony.  While the House is pondering an issue they should know by now, they might want to consider thisbsolution and stop wasting time.

59 responses so far

59 Responses to “Hastert Fiddles As Party Destructs”

  1. az redneck says:

    OK, choose your own color. But count the majority party votes on all the issues, and you know where the bill is on that spectrum.
    Further deponent sayeth not.

  2. crosspatch says:

    The problem is that in the Senate you need more than a majority. There is this thing called cloture that many Americans don’t really understand. Yes, a majority vote wins the day, but you need 60 senators to vote for cloture (ending of debate on the bill) before you can even try for the 51 votes needed to pass.

    In order to get the 60 votes needed to get an up/down vote, you need either a large majority for the bill where there is a good sense it will pass, or a large majority opposed where there is a good sense it is going to fail. A bill this important will not be allowed to go to the floor for a vote until everyone fairly certain what the outcome is going to be.

    So … the Republicans don’t have 60, and the Democrats don’t have 60 so in order to get it to the floor to vote, they need to reach a compromise.

  3. crosspatch says:

    In other words. In the Senate:

    51 gives your party a majority
    60 makes your party “fillibuster proof”
    66 makes your party “veto proof”

  4. Terrye says:

    I am not misleading anyone, I am simply saying that I would prefer action that leads to a real bill that can actually pass to a lot of ranting and raving and demonizing.

  5. Terrye says:


    Yes and they often times put things in those bills they know will not survive conference, just so they can say they tried. It gives them cover for voting for certain bills at all. It is part of the process.

  6. retire05 says:

    FE is correct about the tax “amnesty” amendment to S.B. 2611. Not only do they get to “pick” the three years they have to pay taxes for, they do not have to do this until after eight years after applying for a green card. And not until the green card is APPROVED.
    So please, tell me, what Americans get to decide which of three out of five years they will pay taxes on?
    Also, there is a provision for farm workers who are given “amnesty”. They will have to be paid what is considered by the Federal government to be “prevailing wage”. American workers and naturalized citizens do not have this same guarantee. So illegals who have been granted amnesty will be earning more than their American counterparts.
    I find it odd that so many want to discuss what is in the bill while never having waded through almost 700 pages of it. It is a travesty but there are those who say “we must compromise”. Why? We already have laws on the books. Enforce them. Did the founding fathers “compromise” with England in 1776? There are those who say “a bad bill is better than no bill at all”. Why? There are already laws on the books. Again, enforce them.
    So we give them “amnesty” from all the laws that the illegals have broken by entering the U.S. illegally. (31 of them by count according to the Senate Judicial committee). What is next? What special interest group is going to decide that laws on the books are prejudical against them?
    Terrye wants to implant in your mind images of Iraqi-type mass graves filled with illegals with throwbacks to the Radical Republicans standing over them. Anyone who doesn’t agree with her is a Radical. No dissention to her opinion allowed. There are others on this tread that would take the same stand.
    But none of these people have admitted to living in the war zone that is our southern borders. None of them have had illegals march through their property, night after night, stealing everything that is not nailed down.
    And where is the argument that we must insist, INSIST, that Mexico assumes responsibility for their own? Or that Mexico cease and dissist giving booklets on how to sneak into our nation, stop the corruption that is the Mexican I.D. cards, exporting it’s citizens while it imports Central Americans who work for $3.50 a day? We were told that NAFTA was going to make the Mexican economy better and the Mexican would be happy to stay at home. Ooops.
    We are told that Mexico is a poor nation. Not so. We are told the illegals are just coming for jobs, but the Pew Hispanic Center survey states that 95% of all illegals from Mexico had jobs in their native land.
    Bottom line: we are being fed a bill of goods to pander to a group of people who do not have the will to change their own nation for the better but march in our streets to demand we change our nation to fit them.

  7. Terrye says:

    Fine retire let’s just make it a law to shoot a wetback everyday and be done with it.

  8. Terrye says:

    And by the way people who work on farms are not always paid the minimum wage, they are often paid the prevailing wage so saying that migrant farm workers will be paid the prevailing wage does not make them special at all, if anything it makes it plain that they can not be paid such a low wage that most Americans can not compete. You can not have it both ways, you can not complain that these people undercut wages and they complain that they make more.

  9. For Enforcement says:

    You are taking a worst possible case and applying it to all cases. You note that there is the potential for exemption or waiver of a requirement, and then you conclude that it would be used in every case”

    hey Cross, lift that quote where I “conclude” that and post it for me.

    In the Senate bill case, that IS the worst possible case. All I said is that contained within the Senate bill is an exemption or exception for any scenario and in every case it is in favor of ALL illegal immigrants being able to become a citizen.

    Then you say: quoting me:
    “All they have to do is sign a statement themselves as to how long they have been here

    And here you claim to know by exactly what procedure a waiver will be granted”

    I didn’t claim to know anything EXCEPT what the bill itself says. That provision couldn’t be anymore clear to anyone that has read it. You sign a statement, it can’t be investigated. I’m not saying that, the senate bill says it AND I know very well that I have quoted that to you before, you just choose to ignore it.
    You CrossP are one of the ones that my Statement above applies to: and here it is again so you don’t have to look it up:

    “What I understand about the Immigration situation is the only correct one. Nobody understands it as well as I do. Neither the House Bill or the Senate Bill will completely solve it. But I feel like you are wrong in what the Senate bill will do, you didn’t read it correctly. What you believe is in it, is not there. No matter what you say, you’re not gonna change my mind. If you don’t believe as I do, then you are just wrong.”

    I will concede that it also applies to me.

  10. retire05 says:

    Terrye, I find it odd that you would use a slang term that is extremely offensive. Do you think that lends credibility to your argument?
    You seem to be the radical. Where has anyone who feels the way I do suggested, even in jest, that illegals be shot? If you cannot present your argument without the insults, then perhaps you should remain quiet for your insults add nothing but a sense of desparation on your part.
    Now to prevailing wages; yes, some workers are paid prevailing wages. But it is not guaranteed as it will be to those who are granted amnesty.
    Why don’t you wade through the bill and get back to us, in a week or two?

  11. For Enforcement says:

    Terrye said:

    “Fine retire let’s just make it a law to shoot a wetback everyday and be done with it. “”

    Left by Terrye on June 14th, 2006

    That’s her solution, I don’t think too many would share her views.,

    AJ, you’re not gonna allow someone to advocate murdering immigrants on this site are you? I think that is just despicable of TERRYE.

  12. For Enforcement says:

    You weren’t taken out of context were you TERRYE?

  13. For Enforcement says:

    But to say this is an out and out amnesty for all is a lie. A big fat lie.

    Left by Terrye on June 14th, 20

    Okay, just who would NOT be eligible for amnesty?

  14. For Enforcement says:


    “but on the right all I hear is hysterical emoting”

    so, TERRYE, does this hysterical emoting on your part mean you are on the right?

  15. Terrye says:


    Just who would not be eliglible for a pardon from the Governor if he was sitting on death row? The fact that someone might be elgible for something under specific circumstances does not mean everyone everywhere will get it. That is circular thinking and you know it, there is no logic to it all.

    You are creating a situation to which there is not solution, only constant complaining.

  16. For Enforcement says:

    You are creating a situation to which there is not solution, only constant complaining.

    Left by Terrye on June 15th, 2006

    And you’re not?
    Just above that I said under the new senate bill everybody would be eligible for Amnesty, you disagreed with that. Now you’re saying you do agree with that. Just that you don’t think it will actually be granted to everyone. Your thinking now is probably still just as screwed up.
    “What I understand about the Immigration situation is the only correct one. Nobody understands it as well as I do. Neither the House Bill or the Senate Bill will completely solve it. But I feel like you are wrong in what the Senate bill will do, you didn’t read it correctly. What you believe is in it, is not there. No matter what you say, you’re not gonna change my mind. If you don’t believe as I do, then you are just wrong.”

    I will concede that it also applies to me.

  17. momdear1 says:

    The polls must be rigged. I don’t know of anybody who is in favor of giving amnesty and citizenship, under any circumstances, to all these illegal aliens who have snuck in here and are destroying the very fabric of this country. Most of our good paying manufacturing jobs have been off shored to China and India and now the service jobs, taking care of and building houses for the people on the Govt. payroll and dole, are being filled by people who are willing to work for paractically nothing. It’s as if the pro amnesty gang doesn’t care what it does to American citizens, so long as we compasionately take care of the have nots of the world. It’s time we rounded them all up and shipped them back to from whence they came. If we weren’t providing a safety valve, these mistreated and underpaid workers would be demanding that their governments back home fix their problems.
    During the Clinton years, airline pilots were calling in to talk raido shows and reporting what appeared to be concentration camps out in wilderness areas all over the country. One host managed to get an explanation out fo the Dept. of Interior. He was told the camps were being built to hold up to 3 million illegal immigrants. So, do we have the “beds” to hold them or not?
    You say I am heartless….You bet I am. I believe charity begins at home and if we dont’ take care of our own families nobody else is going to. What are these illegals costing me? Higher taxes, more expensive medical care, overcrowed schools, overpriced real estate and housing, and good paying jobs for my relatives and neighbors.

  18. For Enforcement says:

    momdear1 My friend, you have an insightful grasp of the situation.

  19. For Enforcement says:

    TERRYE, have any luck on your hunting trip today?