Amnesty: An Attempt To Block Local Efforts At Immigration Enforcement?

The feds won't do it, so local governments have begun trying to enforce the law. And this aggression will not stand.

A yet unanswered question is “Why is the open borders lobby pushing for amnesty?” After all, they had it pretty good with no federal enforcement.

Chertoff and Kyl both seem to have answered that question recently, Kyl in his Wall Street Journal interview and Chertoff on Fox News yesterday: because businesses are starting to worry about efforts to enforce immigration laws at the local level. One state in the vanguard of that effort is Kyl’s (and McCain’s) home state of Arizona, where the legislature has passed numerous laws (usually vetoed) on the issue, and where the public voted for Prop 200 back in 2004.

To me that says something far more ominous than that Congress is being disingenuous or naïve on the matter. Far from simple being empty promises, this amnesty bill is actually a blatant attempt to head off any attempts at enforcement at all. After all, states and cities can’t deny services or enforce laws against illegals if the government makes them all legal.

In a Rasmussen poll, a whopping 69% of Americans anti-Hispanic bigots preferred a less comprehensive bill that put enforcement first.

Just 20% of American voters want Congress to try and pass the immigration reform bill that failed in the Senate last week. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 51% would like their legislators to “take smaller steps towards reform” while 16% believe they should wait until next year. The survey was conducted on Monday and Tuesday night as the President was publicly attempting to rally support for the legislation.

Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters would favor an approach that focuses exclusively on “exclusively on securing the border and reducing illegal immigration.” Support for the enforcement only approach comes from 84% of Republicans, 55% of Democrats, and 69% of those not affiliated with either major party.

Overall, just 21% are opposed to the enforcement-only approach.

MSM anmest-pologists continue polling on hypothetical bills, their questions focusing on hard-to-say-no-to generalities like whether Hispanic immigrants should have the opportunity, like any other people in the entire world, to apply for legal status and a green card and even citizenship. Note the opportunity part; note especially the "apply" part, which implies a chance at legalization, not an automatic legalization within 24 hours of application.

Rasmussen finds that only 20% of the public supports the bill as written. Why don't the LAT and other amenesty-boosters simply ask if the public supports the bill? Why do they continue asking about, essentially, other bills that aren't currently being debated? Kaus answers:

The LAT could have countered Rasmussen by asking voters what they thought about the actual bill. They didn't. Why take chances?

Indeed. It seems our MSM is -- get this -- simply lying to us at this point. They know damn well what results would flow from actually asking about the bill under consideration. So they deliberately ask about just about anything other than that, then push their results as being, actually, about the bill itself.

At Hot Air, a clip of Laura Ingraham and Michelle Malkin agreeing the conservative coalition is "finished" if this amnesty bill passes. Indeed, I think it's come to that.

At Ingraham's website, a list of all wavering/soft Senators with their contact information.

As the establishment/"leadership" is making threats...

Senate conservatives have been warned by Republican leaders that they must either accept a series of largely symbolic floor votes on a handful of amendments to the immigration reform legislation or see themselves shut out of the process altogether when the chamber resumes work on the bill later this year, GOP lawmakers and aides said Tuesday.

... it's time to start making counter-threats.

How The Left Gets Paid Off: Why is the left going along with a plan to artificially depress labor wages by importing in tens of millions of new legal low-skilled workers? I mean -- besides the fact that these undocumented Americans will vote liberal by 4-to-1 ratios.

Kaus has the answer: Barney Frank has promised to offset the wage-depressing effects of the amnesty/guest worker program by giving the unions even more power to artificially raise wages!

It's the perfect compromise: The no-borders pro-business-subsidy WSJ crowd gets artificial wage depression, but this is all exquisitely balanced by giving the no-borders pro-union left gets artificial wage increases! You see -- everybody wins!

The free market in full effect! Milton Freedman just stood up in his grave to cheer wildly!

Your MSM Is On The Job! To honor Flag Day -- which, let's face it, isn't really much of a holiday, but still -- the Washington Post runs a picture in its free commuter tabloid of the American flag.

Held by an illegal alien, of course.

posted by Ace at 02:34 PM

| Access Comments