Article

2006-05-16 Home Front: WoT

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Oldspook 2006-05-16 00:11|| || Front Page|| [11126 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 FYI - this was written last night right after I heard the Hugh Hewitt interview with Julie Myers, who bascially appeared to be blowing off the fence completely, and emphasizing the Guest Worker aspects.

I am still unimpressed with the speech and its intent, as well as the followup.

But there was a ray of sunshine this morning in that the Administration may have finally woken up when they said: "confirmed with a senior White House source this morning that the president is for robust fencing in urban areas --as exists in El Paso and San Diego-- and for vehicle barriers in rural areas."

As far as conservatives, and security minded folks go, so far, it's not looking good for the President. Almost the entire reaction across the blogosphere has been pretty negative. The quotes are running the gamut from the President has blown it to looking for more specifics on the fence, not impressive. John Hawkins, Right Wing News, overall grade, F. Michelle Malkin, not surprisingly, said, "too little, too late."

Back on the Sunny side of things - Sen Frist has FINALLY realized they are way behind on this and need to act decisevly - and it loooks they like evenhave the right tool to do it: Sen Sessions Amendment:

Over the next ten days, 20 amendments will be offered by Republicans. Many of these amendments if passed by the full Senate would strengthen the border security and interior enforcement provisions of the bill. We must secure our borders first. An amendment that will be introduced by Senator Jeff Sessions would meet the demand for real fencing, constructing an additional 370 miles of triple-layered fencing and 500 miles of vehicle barriers along the areas of our border with Mexico that are most often used by smugglers and illegal aliens. This fencing is to be constructed immediately and will be completed within two years of the passage of this border security legislation. This fencing mileage, combined with provisions in the bill on the Senate floor that authorize other technologies asked for by the border patrol to keep our borders fully surveyed so they can intercept those who cross the border as quickly as possible, will go far to enhancing our border security and keeping America safer

Now lets see if they can actually get the job done instead of just talking about it like they have for the last 5 years.

Posted by Oldspook 2006-05-16 10:42|| 2006-05-16 10:42|| Front Page Top

#2 So maybe you can hold off on the fork until we see what they actually do - and what the President says about the pork loaded bill coming up (VETO!) and how he handles getting MORE judges in the nominations hopper - and getting them confirmed quickly evne if it means running over Specter who has become even more of an obstructianist than the Dems.

Posted by Oldspook 2006-05-16 10:44|| 2006-05-16 10:44|| Front Page Top

#3 RANT -
He refuses to recognize that the arguments being made for illegal, guest and H1B visa holders are among the ones the South made in support of Slavery!

What do slaves, H1B visa holders, Illegal Aliens and Guest Workers have in common?
1) They can have their lives turned upside down upon the whim of their bosses.
Slaves can be killed or sold or mal-treated.
H1B visa holders, Illegal Aliens and Guest Workers can be kicked out of the US at the whim of their boss who only needs to call the INS and ask for their exit. (slavery in a different guise)
2) They all receive substandard wages for their efforts. In some respect the slaves might do a tad better here as they were property who's value the owner did not want to degrade faster than their depreciation schedule.
/RANT

Posted by 3dc 2006-05-16 10:53|| 2006-05-16 10:53|| Front Page Top

#4 Give endless credit to Bush. He is above the obvious debate because he is looking at the big picture, which I haven't seen mentioned anywhere.

That is, consider immigration in light of the following:

1) Mexico is facing an upcoming election where a popular candidate may become a close ally to Chavez of Venezuela. A tough immigration bill right now might turn Mexico into a dangerous leftist regime. Possibly a civil war with millions of refugees.

2) The Free Trade Agreement of the Americas is one of the US's, and Bush's biggest diplomatic initiatives ever. Adamantly opposed by Chavez and the other SA leftists, Mexico is one of the biggest proponents of the FTAA. It could open up enormous markets throughout the entire SA continent to the US. With Mexican help.

3) Mexico is a major producer of oil and natural gas, vast amounts of the latter supplying much of the energy of southern California. And while their crude oil isn't the best, it could be very valuable in the absence of Gulf and Venezuelan crude.

4) Already western agriculture is feeling a pinch from a shortage of migrant labor. If the US issued a green card to most illegal aliens, it would barely be enough to maintain current production, and at significantly higher cost. Most vegetables and fruits would have a 50% price hike overnight. Without migrants at all, perhaps 300-500% price increase in most of the country. An apple for $3?

5) Many of the proposed solutions and non-solutions to the problem are very radical, or extremely unreasonable, from expelling 30 million people from the US, to completely open borders. There is a forced sense of extreme urgency to a problem that has existed since the 1960s, powerful interests that wish to keep the status quo, and bizarre lobbying efforts (many of which are nothing more than 'attack Bush' efforts). The bottom line is that Bush is not a dictator, so any real solution must come with the help of Congress, as reasonable or as wacky as they want to be.

6) In addition, there are many other linkages that would come into play, some major, many minor. All have to be considered by Bush. He deserves much support for whatever he decides.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-05-16 11:34|| 2006-05-16 11:34|| Front Page Top

#5 Chavez should have had an AIRPLANE accident, at least on this trans-alantic trip.

Bush is to blame for that not happening.

Posted by 3dc 2006-05-16 12:13|| 2006-05-16 12:13|| Front Page Top

#6 If Bush had any balls, Chavez would have an accident, and the border wall would be build about 100 miles south of the border.
Next time, we'll take 200 miles.

Posted by wxjames 2006-05-16 13:39|| 2006-05-16 13:39|| Front Page Top

#7 I think Hugo is still on his 'trip'....there's still hope, 3dc.

Posted by Inspector Clueso 2006-05-16 14:00|| 2006-05-16 14:00|| Front Page Top

#8 Anonymoose: Most vegetables and fruits would have a 50% price hike overnight. Without migrants at all, perhaps 300-500% price increase in most of the country. An apple for $3?

I seriously doubt that. Korean apples cost 80 cents each. This is using farmland that costs $100,000 an acre. Upstate New York farmland costs $2,000 an acre. Stateside Mexican labor costs the same as Korean labor. I understand that you like the idea of looser immigration controls with respect to Mexico, but the numbers cited need to be a little more thought out. Note also that domestic produce growers don't exist in a national bubble - if their prices skyrocket, we can just as easily import these things from abroad. Europeans have very little farm land, comparable wages, don't have huge numbers of illegal immigrants, and their produce prices aren't five times our own. Again, a little rigor would be nice. Domestic farmers aren't free to raise their prices at will. We can import the things they grow here from Australia, China, Argentina, Chile, et al.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2006-05-16 15:34|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2006-05-16 15:34|| Front Page Top

#9 2) The Free Trade Agreement of the Americas is one of the US's, and Bush's biggest diplomatic initiatives ever. Adamantly opposed by Chavez and the other SA leftists, Mexico is one of the biggest proponents of the FTAA. It could open up enormous markets throughout the entire SA continent to the US. With Mexican help.

Don't we already have NAFTA and CAFTA ?
What help can we get from the Mexicans ?
They seem uninterested in bettering their country.

3) Mexico is a major producer of oil and natural gas, vast amounts of the latter supplying much of the energy of southern California. And while their crude oil isn't the best, it could be very valuable in the absence of Gulf and Venezuelan crude.

I am under the impression that their petroleum rresources would be of some use regardless of venezuela.
Why don't they pump it and sell it to us and feed their little starving garbage hunting children ?

4) Already western agriculture is feeling a pinch from a shortage of migrant labor. If the US issued a green card to most illegal aliens, it would barely be enough to maintain current production, and at significantly higher cost. Most vegetables and fruits would have a 50% price hike overnight. Without migrants at all, perhaps 300-500% price increase in most of the country. An apple for $3?

Migrant farm workers are not the problem. They are the ones who will hopefully get "temporary worker" cards.
There are millions MILLIONS not working on farms at all.
If you are say, a roofer, by trade it doesn't matter how much lettuce costs, you can't outcompete foriegn slave-labor and you are SOL.

Posted by jim#6 2006-05-16 15:44|| 2006-05-16 15:44|| Front Page Top

#10 Already western agriculture is feeling a pinch from a shortage of migrant labor.

So now the migrants don't want those jobs either huh ?

Posted by jim#6 2006-05-16 15:46|| 2006-05-16 15:46|| Front Page Top

#11 Mexico has needed serious reform for a century. If that reform comes after a Marxist idiot destroys their economy so be it. Sometimes folks have to hit rock bottom before they can recover.

On the other hand there is a time and a place for an FDR infrastructure rebuilding and that's what Mr Mayor Marxist is planning so perhaps they'll turn themselves into a little Sweden. Peaceful, socialist, and economically sinking with a smile.

It'll be nice to have a secure border during the worst parts of their collapse.

Posted by rjschwarz">rjschwarz 2006-05-16 15:50|| 2006-05-16 15:50|| Front Page Top

#12 Perhaps it's time to change words of the song to "To the Halls of Montezuma...."

Posted by RWV 2006-05-16 16:25|| 2006-05-16 16:25|| Front Page Top

#13 ZF: We can import the things they grow here from Australia, China, Argentina, Chile, et al.

And by the time that orange gets here, it has gone up in price, and down in taste. Not to mention the loss of income for an American producer, and more money flowing out of the US. Yeah sure, I guess you could say it's great for the global economy.

jim: If you are say, a roofer, by trade it doesn't matter how much lettuce costs, you can't outcompete foriegn slave-labor and you are SOL.

It matters if the roofer consumes lettuce. And it also matters to McDonald's, one of the biggest purchasers of lettuce.

Posted by Snavise Uleatch2308 2006-05-16 18:24|| 2006-05-16 18:24|| Front Page Top

#14 BTW, anyone else finds it ironic that not so long ago Bush could do no wrong on the WOT, but now the very same people who supported him are planning his downfall over a non-islamofascist issue? What's the deal here? Is illegal immigration more important than Iraq and Afghanistan?

Posted by Snavise Uleatch2308 2006-05-16 18:32|| 2006-05-16 18:32|| Front Page Top

#15 equally important - it's an exploitable sieve

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2006-05-16 18:34|| 2006-05-16 18:34|| Front Page Top

#16 "What's the deal here? Is illegal immigration more important than Iraq and Afghanistan?"

They're equally important. How can one justify globetrotting with the military while simultaneously leaving the borders essentially unguarded? Further, how can one use 9/11 as justification for such globetrotting while simultaneously NOT fixing the very same immigration tracking system that had no clue of the whereabouts of many of the hijackers who had filled out the appropriate forms at one time but over-stayed their welcome without penalty?

I was (and remain) a Bush supporter, but he is being willful and stubborn in regard to this issue. Its (at least) 5 years past time to fix the border and to fix the system responsible for tracking the non-citizens we allow into our country.

Posted by Crusader 2006-05-16 19:34|| 2006-05-16 19:34|| Front Page Top

#17 Remeber Rome? Spent their coin and manpower in wars with the Persians who were no direct threat to them, but allowed hundreds of thousands if not a million Goths through the Rhine frontier cause they didn't have enough military resources [both bodies and money] to cover it. Then there was a manpower shortage so they started employing the Goths as auxilary troops, who inturn learned the Roman system. Kept to themselves they did, not like the Iberians or Gauls who 'Romanized'. Eventually, it was the Goths who owned Rome.

Posted by Spaviper Omasing3654 2006-05-16 19:42|| 2006-05-16 19:42|| Front Page Top

#18 The only thing going for Geroge and the Rebublicans is I will not vote for a Democrat because we can't afford top lose thjis war we are in.

Bush has dropped the ball on this and lost the media war a long time ago. He just never fought them with the same energy that came from their hate of him.

Message to Republicans. Turn on your radio and listen to the AM band in California. More spanish language stations then english language ones. Why? Oh that's to keep the illegals enterained and informed. Those "jobs no one else will do" my ass it's. My job they are doing. It's your rich counrty club Republican friends hiring them.

If we were not in a war we can't afford to lose I would turn you out in a heartbeat. Unemployeed since 1999. Mexicans are doing the work I qualify for. The Republican Party can bite me.

Posted by SPoD 2006-05-16 19:54|| http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/]">[http://sockpuppetofdoom.blogspot.com/] 2006-05-16 19:54|| Front Page Top

#19 What do they call it in Soccer when even the defense cross the centerline and gets into the offense? I think its soccer, when you pray nobody gets a good long kick into your open goal.

Posted by rjschwarz">rjschwarz 2006-05-16 20:03|| rjschwarz.com]">[rjschwarz.com] 2006-05-16 20:03|| Front Page Top

#20
"If you are say, a roofer, by trade..."

Here in Texas, ALL of the construction trades are
filled entirely by Mexicans! And I know, just know,
that most of them are here legally! [/sarcasm]

Roofer, mason...etc., you won't find very many non-hispanics in the trades. You can't swing a dead cat without hitting an illegal alien.

They knock on doors handing out poorly written flyers (because, they no speaka da english) offering to clean house and do other chores.

Sheesh! All of them out now!

-M

Posted by Manolo 2006-05-16 22:24|| 2006-05-16 22:24|| Front Page Top

23:56 Matt K.
23:55 Seafarious
23:54 Snavise Uleatch2308
23:50 Captain America
23:49 Captain America
23:47 MacNails
23:47 Old Patriot
23:47 Captain America
23:43 Captain America
23:42 twobyfour
23:37 2b
23:36 3dc
23:31 Old Patriot
23:29 3dc
23:27 3dc
23:20 Snavise Uleatch2308
23:18 Old Patriot
23:17 Captain America
23:16 SteveS
23:16 DMFD
23:00 Snavise Uleatch2308
22:57 Ulogum Gluth2284
22:57 Snavise Uleatch2308
22:48 DMFD