Captain's Quarters -

A nice roundup Capt; and as I said in an earlier post on this topic, I said that if I liked the Amendment, it wouldn't pass!

Guess what?

I guess we should not really be surprised, should we?

Neither by the Republicans, and especially by the Democrats.

Wish someone like you Capt, with an "audience", could truly start a National Movement/website, called:

www.votethemalloutofoffice.com

And we throw all the bums, Democrats and Republicans out of office in 2008!

McCain
Lott
Pelosi
Boxer
Reid
Snowe
Hagel
Lugar

ad naseum...

Guess I can dream, can't I???

Lots of times on the very close votes there are a few votes that could have gone the other way if needed, and that's the feeling I get on this one. Several other Senators would have voted no if needed, but they didn't want the heat of defeating it . My guess is it would have still failed even if they had a few more votes as others would have fallen away.

This was the dynamic during the 1990's with the Balanced Budget amendment. Every few years it would come up and fall just short of the 67 needed in the senate. The no votes changed, with senators having a change of heart in the year after their election. This rolling 'NO' kept the yes at 64 or 65 each time. I have no doubt that it would have failed by a wider gap in a secret ballot.

Bob Dole's maxim is in play -- you can never go wrong voting for a bill that fails or against one that passes.

A nice roundup Capt; and as I said in an earlier post on this topic, I said that if I liked the Amendment, it wouldn't pass!

Guess what?

I guess we should not really be surprised, should we?

Neither by the Republicans, and especially by the Democrats.

Wish someone like you Capt, with an "audience", could truly start a National Movement/website, called:

www.votethemalloutofoffice.com

And we throw all the bums, Democrats and Republicans out of office in 2008!

McCain
Lott
Pelosi
Boxer
Reid
Snowe
Hagel
Lugar

ad naseum...

Guess I can dream, can't I???

Lots of times on the very close votes there are a few votes that could have gone the other way if needed, and that's the feeling I get on this one. Several other Senators would have voted no if needed, but they didn't want the heat of defeating it . My guess is it would have still failed even if they had a few more votes as others would have fallen away.

This was the dynamic during the 1990's with the Balanced Budget amendment. Every few years it would come up and fall just short of the 67 needed in the senate. The no votes changed, with senators having a change of heart in the year after their election. This rolling 'NO' kept the yes at 64 or 65 each time. I have no doubt that it would have failed by a wider gap in a secret ballot.

Bob Dole's maxim is in play -- you can never go wrong voting for a bill that fails or against one that passes.

We're being taken for a ride Captain.

And this is with all the pressure coming down on them. Imagine all the lobby and court-driven goodies and revisions that are going to happen when the pressure relents or shifts to something else.

I think it is time to start a new party, captain. Just as Ronald Reagan said, "I didn't leave the Democratic party, it left me" I don't see much I like about the Republican party any more. It is populated by a bunch of Liberal inside-the beltway faux conservatives.
Do we have time to launch a march on Washington? I say we try to get a million into washington. Perhaps then we will have a chance to save this country.

Actually they only needed one of them to vote for it. Cheney would have broken the tie... hmm but then again, since this is Bush's baby, would he have?

Can anyone really say they're surprised by the names on the Republican "no" list?

Brownback & Thomas not showing is more aggravating than the "Hagel caucus".

Oh, and Lindsey Graham? Pick up your check; you're not going to be VP or anything else.

Well, this was a useful exercise:
1) gives Norm Coleman more than ample reason to vote against the main bill;
2) gives us a list of 9 Whigs who should be opposed for reelection by conservatives, with Lindsey Graham at the top of the Whig-hit list for 08;
3) makes clear that Sam Brownback must never be allowed near the White House.

Sanctionary laws are a terrible problem and enable increased illegal immigration.

The problem is the corrupt narco government of Mexico and that's where the solution must come from. The light-skinned racists in Mexico City how control all the levers of power and money and refuse to invest it in their own country to benefit all of their citizens. Don't believe me?

See the report just published by the World Bank about Mexico's chronic corruption and their plan to emigrate tens of millions of their people to the USA, which the report says is creating problems for both nations.

over at NRO they make the (in retrospect) self evident point that since the amendment grants every illegal probationary legal status, every city becomes a "sanctuary city." Ending "sanctuary cities" becomes rather pointless, if the full bill passes. 'Twas a mere gesture.

"John McCain voted in support of the Coleman amendment. He has taken criticism for not making votes in the Senate, but he did vote in this instance to toughen the enforcement of existing immigration law."

You can bet your bottom dollar that McCain showed up to cast this vote only because he knew it was meaningless; i.e., he knew the amendment would fail. Pure window dressing.

We are being sliced and diced, folks. It's three-card monty as the GOP, Donks, and Bush continue dealing out the middle class.

The game is up and we lost. What's more, we don't even have the intestinal fortitude or stamina to throw the game.

This bill will pass, warts upon warts and all, and Bush will celebrate with his legacy having changed this country for a generation... perhaps more. While his legacy survives, the nation as we know it will not.

Here in Texas the democrats just succeeded in stopping the common sense voter reform of simply demanding some sort of ID at the polling place.
It is no longer in doubt that most democrats and some Republicans are operating in bad faith towards the future of this nation. whatever their claimed motives, Graham, Hagel, most of the dems, and similar ilk, are actively working to hurt this country and to change its face by ways other than lawful. They are seeking to aid and abet law breakers, whether local governments refusing to comply with federal law, or in organized voter fraud to steal elections.
There is no point in us doing anything else than to throw them out of power and to erase the damage they are doing.

If you had told me how far to the left the GOP would have moved by 07 back in 01 I would have said you were crazy. Hard to believe that the chairman of the party is so far to the left, or way left of what we used to consider the center in 01.
This dramatic move to the left makes the MSM/DNC seem right when they call Edwards and Obama "moderates".

Someone posted above: "Bob Dole's maxim is in play -- you can never go wrong voting for a bill that fails or against one that passes." This is an interesting and cogent observation, and brings me to something that I have been pondering since: a) the do nothing Repub majority, recently became b) the minority again.

I have reached the conclusion (perhaps a "well duh" moment, I realize) that, contrary to what most 'pundits' claim about how Repub politicians have to do this or do that if they ever want to be in the majority again.....I happen to think those RINOs we all voted for....COULDN'T CARE LESS if they are the minority party. What could be easier than being a vocal and 'principaled' back-bencher, voting for those "conservative" ideals you know g-damn well will never pass. No consequences to you one way or another - but you DO get to put those glowing bullet point self praise proclamations on your glossy re-election brochure, mailed out to the party "faithful" (aka "dupes") each election cycle......

"Joe Bloe - Stood FIRM For the Rights of the Unborn, by Voting AGAINST ..." .....
."Joe Bloe - Strongly Supported our National Security by Introducing and Championing the .....Bill" Etc.

You get my drift. You've seen the campaign flyers, the sincere smiling public "servant" posed against a background of supportive spouse, clean-cut kids, and Old Glory.

Sucker.

Unlike the Dem leadership, which to their credit has alway appeared to be brutally ambitious and craven to hold POWER, I have concluded that those country club, Rockefeller, Wall Street Journal, big business elite RINOS probably LOVE being the minority. Employment for life in the Halls of Power, with all the cushy perks that come with it.

This sucker, this dupe, this idiot, has fallen for the con game over and over and over again, for the past 30 years. Yes, can you believe it - I was an enthusiastic supporter of.....wait for it......that jackass MEL MARTINEZ. Yes, I am embarassed to admit it. (Oh, P.T. Barnum is grinning from ear to ear down from somewhere at me, I just know it).

But it's over. I'm done. I'll vote third party. Or perhaps I'll just sit at home and purchase Berlitz spanish tapes and try to learn our future language; and probably become a gun owner for the very first time - while there is still time of course.

Cutting off my nose to spite my face? - yes yes, I get told that every damn election, and I end up caving...."step right up.....greatest show on earth." That argument ain't working for me any more. I didn't leave the Republican party. It left me. And now I am a citizen without a party.

If there are "sanctuary cities," and they're not in your state, then just make sure the illegals know where they are. Hand out maps.

I'm sorry to say that Richard Lugar is one of my senators. I sent him a note several days ago stating, in no uncertain terms, that if he helps pass this abortion of an immigration bill, I'm not voting for him next time.

Lugar's vote today has firmly established that he not only has a tin ear but also a tin brain. As far as I'm concerned, Richard Lugar's political future is toast. I'll be henceforth doing what I can to ensure Lugar receives the retirement he so richly deserves.

Now anyone that lives in one of these cities know which congress member will not protect them and their families. When anyone in one of the 'Mexican Murderer's Protected' cities is murdered by a Mexican you know who to blame, 100%. Time to take action against these nuts, the election will be too late. Recall is a possibility.

My question is simple. Has Olympia Snowe voted in any manner in the last six months that resembles the ideals or opinions of a Republican??!!! Why in the world is Senator Snowe even designated as a Republican?

And now, Chuck Hagel...apparently he has decided that since he got so much camera time and invites to Meet The Depressed and DisgraceTheNation with his opposition to the Iraq War, he might as well adopt the Dem stance on Immigration - what's next Chuck? You going to vote for the Dem's spending bill?

I guess this just shows Hagel's true intentions of running for Pres. as an "Independent" candidate. Good riddance, Hagel - the Republican Party accepts your resignation with glee. Oh and take Olympia Snowe with ya, she's as worthless as a bag of nickels.

Don't know if it's true, but WND is reporting this:

North American union plan headed to Congress in fall
Powerful think tank prepares report on benefits of integration between U.S., Mexico, Canada

http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55830

RE: Sandy P (May 24, 2007 5:46 PM)

Components of it are incorporated in the Bush-McCain-Kennedy Reconquista Bill currently being "debated" via the Security and Prosperity Partnership:

SEC. 413. BILATERAL EFFORTS WITH MEXICO TO REDUCE MIGRATION PRESSURES AND COSTS.

SEC.413(a)(9) The Partnership for Prosperity is a bilateral initiative launched jointly by the President of the United States and the President of Mexico in 2001, which aims to boost the social and economic standards of Mexican citizens, particularly in regions where economic growth has lagged and emigration has increased.

SEC.413(a)(10) The Presidents of Mexico and the United States and the Prime Minister of Canada, at their trilateral summit on March 23, 2005, agreed to promote economic growth, competitiveness, and quality of life in the agreement on Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America.

SEC.413(b) Sense of Congress Regarding Partnership for Prosperity- It is the sense of Congress that the United States and Mexico should accelerate the implementation of the Partnership for Prosperity to help generate economic growth and improve the standard of living in Mexico, which will lead to reduced migration, by-- ...

SEC.413(c)Sense of Congress Regarding Bilateral Partnership on Health Care- It is the sense of Congress that the Government of the United States and the Government of Mexico should enter into a partnership to examine uncompensated and burdensome health care costs incurred by the United States due to legal and illegal immigration, including-- ...

This process was delayed because of 9/11, but Bush has been working on this urgently to get it passed during his tenure. It would have been his first priority (along with nukes in NK and trade imbalance with China) immediately after his election, but Al-Qaeda, Afghanistan, and Iraq resorted the priorities.

Bush is under the gun to get this POS legislation passed under a cooperative Congress. The momentum has been building in the background for some time. I don't think our constituency has the guts or interest to stop it. We'll keep voting the same people in because we think we have no option. Perhaps we don't.

Well, good thing I couldnt get through when I called capitol hill today to talk to Lugar's office, I'll be sure to bring this up when I do get throough. The only way I can accept his voting against his ammendment is if he has a tougher one in mind. They were already going to catch some flak from me, but now this. Disgusting.

The only reason McCain could have for voting for the Coleman amendment is realizing that without it the bill could be in danger of not passing. Never attribute to decency what ulterior motives can explain just as well, not in McCain's case anyway. No bill is better than the bill we're in danger of ending up with. I added an excerpt and link to my 2007.05.24 "Just Enforce The Damned Law" Roundup.  

Calling George Sonofavitch a Republican would be a horrid insult to republicans every except Ohio *sigh*

Here's the canary in the coal mine--it just died. If a measure such as this can make the muster, I think the entire immigration bill is just a Trojan Horse for amnesty. It's time to roll up this dog and pony show and vote the whole "reform" measure down.

Here's the canary in the coal mine--it's dead. If a measure such as this can't make the muster, then I think the entire immigration bill is going to be a Trojan Horse for illegal immigrant mass amnesty. It's time to roll up this dog and pony show and vote the whole "reform" measure down.

Hey guys, Democrats are beating themselves up over the Iraq vote that just happened. They are changing their registration in droves over it. Check out theleftcoaster.com, they are flailing themselves all over this. Come on guys, lets try to stay together a little bit here. We're in a minority, our president just forced the majority to conceed on the war. If we can stay united, he may have just helped our nominee win the WH over this vote.

We need to remember SCOTUS, we need to have the WH for the three or so nominees the next president will make. The election is about SCOTUS and not about anything else.

Eugene Podrazik,

See Status of S.1348. Note how practically every amendment, and all of the significant ones, are contrary to the interests of those wanting enforcement and real control of the chaos.

This shamnesty will pass despite the dog and pony show we see. Yes, it's a sort of Trojan Horse, except that we know its hidden cargo before we let it in. Yet in it will come. Such is the overwhelming desire of the political class to force dishonest legislation upon us.

Congress has been working this with the President for months. The Senate is not surprised at the public outrage as is evidenced by the way in which it was all created in secret and fast-tracked for cloture until the public shined some light on the process. Even Kyl and Cornyn, two supposedly "restrictionist" Senators, backed/created the original text and have highlighted their late date reservations only when they saw the public outcry. Reid, et al, are delaying the inevitable only to assuage the genuine fears of the constituency that process was being abused, an image Congress cannot afford to let linger lest distrust in the institution be validated. All of these amendments and feigned outrage by the Senators is choreographed vote-splitting where the outcomes have already been predetermined. They whip and count votes only to the extent that the final goal, i.e. passage of the amnesty, is attained and so that they can provide some degree of customized cover for each Senator in their particular, well analyzed district. The Senate is in a holding pattern only because an angry public agitated via internet pundits/commentators discovered the text and called them on their actions. It won't last.

Kabuki theater at its nauseating worst. This is dishonest government. And we keep reelecting it.

It seems to me that all the local "sanctuary" laws are unconstitutional on their face - where laws conflict, federal law prevails.

As noted above, though, since the probationary "Z-visas" will be pretty much automatically granted (the government having only 24 hours from submission of the app to conduct a background check and find a reason to deny it), the whole country would become, in effect, a sanctuary.

No distinction between illegals from countries with major jihadi networks and those from friendly countries is made, either.

I favor a comprehensive plan with guest workers and an eventual "path to citizenship" for the worthy, but also with strong and effective border and visa security measures. This plan fails in that regard.

AD,

Right on target as usual...

Peter,

You must read this article.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/RebeccaHagelin/2007/05/25/ripping_the_lid_off_a_secret_immigration_deal

Go to the Heritage Foundation website and read their analysis of this bill; they break it down, measure by measure... Winning the election in 08 is meaningless if we allow for their ultimate goal of an Northern Alliance with Canada & Mexico; NO BORDERS..... Read it all Peter.

Show me someone who doubts that the immigration bill being railroaded through Congress is amnesty — and I’ll show you someone who hasn’t read the bill.

The Devil Is in the Details 05/21

For months, behind closed doors, a handful of Democratic and Republican staffers, along with a few senators and principals from the administration, have been writing a “comprehensive immigration-reform package.” Until Saturday morning, the legislation has been unavailable to any other senators or staff, let alone the media, policy analysts or the general public.

I am looking at a copy stamped “DRAFT — FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY” and dated May 18, 2007 11:58 P.M. For the sake of open deliberation and public education, the text has been posted on the Heritage Foundation’s website.

This document is being relied upon by senators and staff as the final language to be debated beginning today, with the expectation of a vote on final passage — without congressional hearings, committee mark-up, fiscal analysis, expert testimony, or public comment — before the end of the week.

This legislation would be the largest reform of immigration policy in 40 years, affecting not only our national security and homeland defense but the fiscal, economic, and social future of the United States for several generations.

Yet the Senate is about to begin a forced-march to debate and vote on legislation that no one — other than a few staffers who wrote it in secret — has read. This is no way to legislate.

The strategy seems to be to hide the legislation for as long as possible, then stage a full-court press to convince the Senate, and the public, that this bill is a good deal.

In Saturday’s Washington Post, Joel Kaplan, deputy White House chief of staff, says the bill contains provisions that “conservatives have wanted for a long time” and those who “know the most about what the bill does are those who have been involved in day in, day out discussions of the drafting of the agreement.” This is a plea for conservatives to blindly endorse a proposal without reading the details.

And, believe me, the devil is in the details. This legislation is long and complicated, with lots of details — and lots of devils. We are pouring through it very closely, but it will take time and effort to discover all of its loopholes and hidden provisions and to comprehend its full implications.

Our Founding Fathers intended the legislature to deliberate and debate the laws they were making on behalf of the American people. The United States Senate is supposedly the most deliberative body in the world. Is that still the case? Will no one object to this disregard for the rule of law?

— Matthew Spalding is director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for American Studies at the Heritage Foundation.

Lots of ranting, the bottom line is that if nobody hires illegals the immigration issue dies and everybody goes back home. Want and end to illegal immigration? Forget Congress, go after the businesses that hire them.

The "sancuary cities" sould have all of their federal funds withheld.

Michelle Malkin (God bless her) has found a way to call your senator on somebody else's nickel. Ironically, an open-borders coalition's nickel! Call 1-800-417-7666 and you can choose which senator you want to talk to, after suffering through a couple of minutes of marching orders.

Read http://michellemalkin.com/archives/007599.htm for the whole story of who's behind the effort.

"That makes 9 Republicans who either voted against enforcing existing immigration laws or didn't bother to show up to defend the law. Any two of them would have passed this amendment."

Unforgivable.

Thank you, Keemo. Yes, Heritage Foundation is performing yeoman's work - doing the job our government won't do. And doing it publicly.

Nate,

Notice the vote wasn't 49-49, a tie, whereby Cheney could have broken it in favor of the "conservative" position. That would have put the administration in a very, publicly awkward situation since it would have been one more twist of the knife by Bush, who wants as much amnesty as possible, into the back of his base if Cheney voted to block this amendment. Brownback couldn't even manage to cast a vote. Nine peers, the exact number needed to fail, voted against the amendment - just enough even to allow McCain, bill sponsor and amnesty pusher, to vote "yea" after his GOP base is just about ready to riot at home and after he has missed so many votes already.

Not a coincidence. Integrity in the vote is gone. This is the kind of vote trading we should abhor.

Obviously, Voinovich learned nothing from his buddy DeWine's loss last year. These idiots (including the president) think the way to be more popular is to appeal to the left thinking we have no where to go. Problem is, as DeWine found out, than idea leave us with no reason to support them. Additionally, the Republicans who cave in to the left to get approval end up gaining no support from them either. DeWine lost conservative support and picked up none from the left costing him what should have been a safe seat in the senate.