Archives for January 2004

This makes absolutely no sense:

House Democrats yesterday proposed granting legal residency and the eventual option of U.S. citizenship to millions of illegal immigrants now working in the United States.

Laying out their own principles for revamping the nation’s immigration laws in response to what House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi called President Bush’s “political ploy,” Democrats went beyond Mr. Bush’s plan for a temporary-worker program and called for a system of “earned legalization” for illegal aliens.

At a Capitol Hill press conference, Democrats proposed allowing illegal immigrants who have worked in the United States for a yet-to-be-determined minimum period of time to stay here and be granted permanent legal residency, creating a “pathway” to eventual citizenship.

“The president’s proposal is a political ploy, and not the solid foundation on which we can build an improved immigration policy,” said Mrs. Pelosi of California. “Democrats have a better way.”

Mrs. Pelosi said Mr. Bush’s recently proposed plan doesn’t create a meaningful way for illegal aliens to become U.S. residents or citizens; doesn’t reduce the backlog of U.S. citizens’ petitions on behalf of relatives who are here illegally; and doesn’t help tens of thousands of teenage illegals attend college here and eventually be granted legal status.

In addition to proposing measures to address those concerns, Democrats endorsed a temporary-worker program that would give foreigners the option to stay in the United States and eventually earn permanent legal status here.

President Bush’s plan, in contrast, would allow illegal aliens already here, as well as newcomers, to work in the United States legally for three years under a temporary-worker program. When their three-year permits expired, such immigrant workers would be required to return to their home countries.

Once back in their home countries, they could apply for legal U.S. status through the existing system. Under the Bush plan, the three-year work permits could be extended in some cases, but not indefinitely.

“The president wants to give [illegal aliens] a lot, but the Democrats want to give them the jackpot,” said Steve Camarota, director of research at the Center for Immigration Studies.

There are only two ways to look at, as either a cynical ploy or additional bumbling by these clueless nitwits. Let’s examine the possibilities.

1.) A Cynical Ploy- While phrasing the President’s policy proposal on illegal immigration and undocumented workers a ‘political ploy,’ it is entirely possible that this is nothing but sheer cynicism on their part. One of the major problems that Democrats in general have is on perceptions of national security, and one of the major difficulties for a Democratic candidate is a credible rush to the center after proving he was a worthy leftist in the primaries.

With that in mind, it might be possible that they floated this ludicrous amnesty for illegal aliens proposal so that the Democratic nominee can come out lodly and denounce it, thus having a Sister Souljah moment. The candidate could then swerve to the right of Bush, and point out that not enough has been done to secure the borders, etc. This is the only way I can see this proposal in a positive way for the Democrats.

2.) Additional Bumbling from the Gang that Couldn’t Shoot Straight- There is a possibility that the hard left in Congress, led by Pelosi and Daschle, simply hate Bush so much that they created this short-sighted proposal just to have another opportunity to attack Bush and to do a little recreational race-baiting. If so, then they have cut off their collective noses to spite their faces.

Bush’s main problem on his immigration policy proposal was not that the center rejected it- it seemed to play fairly well with moderate to conservative Democrats, moderate Republicans and Independents were either sympathetic or agnostic. The people who were pissed were Bush’s base- social conservatives and the far right. It would seem to me that the last thing that the Democrats would want to do when Bush is proposing centrist policies is to propose a counter policy which is going to alienate their moderates while proving to Bush’s base that not voting for Bush could have far worse ramifications if the Democrats have their way. IN other words, unless I am reading this wrong, this proposal will do nothing but help Bush- it really does make him look like a moderate to both the centrist Democrats and Republicans and to the social conservatives.

There is a good chance that the Botox Cheerleader Pelosi and the Mild Mannered Moron Daschle just simply don’t get it. They really do believe their own rhetoric about an emerging liberal majority, and they mistakenly believe that everyone thinks like they do. If they do, they are forgetting that the reason they have won elections in the past is not because of their coalition of wacky interest groups, but because of the support of blue collar Democrats- often called Reagan Democrats. About 98% of Republicans understand the meaning of the term ‘illegal’ in the phrase ‘illegal alien,’ as does about 60% of the Democratic party. The 40% of the Democratic party that fails to understand this distinction consist of the hard left who are going to vote for Anyone but Bush, the several million illegal aliens in California that the Clinton administration already illegally franchised, and the dead Daley voters in Chicago.

I simply don’t know what these guys are thinking, if they even are…

They Have Lost Their MindsPost + Comments (12)

Will the Hutton Report and the Kay Statements slow down the Democratic talking points? It should:

Lord Hutton said that the central 45-minute claim contained in Mr Gilligan’s report could be proved to be wrong in future, but his allegation that the government knew it was wrong when the dossier was published was “unfounded” because intelligence chiefs did believe the source from which it came was reliable.

He described Mr Gilligan’s report as a “grave allegation” and a slur on the government’s integrity.

Mr Blair arrived in the Commons chamber soon afterwards, to a roar of support from his own backbenchers. He was cheered again as he rose to speak.

And then there is this:

In essence, Dr. Kay concludes that while Saddam never ceased trying to build sophisticated WMDs, he probably did not succeed. But Saddam himself probably didn’t know that because his scientists were lying to him and stealing much of the money he gave them.

More specifically, Dr. Kay says it is clear Saddam was attempting to develop nuclear weapons as late as 2001, but his scientists never got as far as Iran did, nor as far as we now know–to our astonishment–that Libya did.

Dr. Kay adds that Saddam was actively working to produce a biological weapon using the poison ricin right up until the American invasion last spring.

But as the CIA underestimated Saddam’s nuclear-weapons program prior to 1991 and Libya’s nuclear program prior to this year, so the CIA overestimated Saddam’s progress toward developing and amassing WMDs prior to 2003. This, Dr. Kay believes, is the result of U.S. intelligence relying on satellites, electronic eavesdropping, exiles, and U.N. inspectors, and failing to put agents in place within the Baathist regime.

Some people will misrepresent the complex reality that Dr. Kay has described. Some people will say that Saddam never had WMD, had no intention to build them and was never a threat.

But Dr. Kay knows what his work shows. “We know that terrorists were passing through Iraq,” he says. “And now we know that there was little control over Iraq’s weapons capabilities. I think it shows that Iraq was a very dangerous place. The country had the technology, the ability to produce, and there were terrorist groups passing through the country–and no central control.”

Don’t expect this to slow down the partisan catcalls (‘Bush lied- People Died,’ or ‘Seventeeen words,’ or my personal favorite because they are too damned cowardly to call him a liar- ‘Bush misled the country into war.’, especially considering that I heard Kerry last night making this a centerpiece of his campaign. Of course, the facts don’t matter- the election is what matters. And of course, we all know that when matters of foreign affairs and national security get in the way o a domestic election, the Democrats are not concerned with facts. Some might classify their spin as ‘truthesque.’

(via the Instapundit)

Democrat Talking PointsPost + Comments (13)