Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
6:39 AM
I think I can speak for roughly 65% of Democrats and 74% of Republicans when I say, "whew...that was close!" But the fact that the Senate has only delayed discussion of the - as it now has been dubbed "The Grand Bargain" - means we stay on offense to hold the Senate's feet to the fire.
It is obvious from everyone that has read anything on his blog in the last five days that Hugh Hewitt should have been consulted on the original bill. Hugh has posted what he considers his "starting seven." What I love about them is that more than half of them - and all coming up front - deal with actual border security:
(1) An amendment to establish a special category of illegal aliens which includes all males between the ages of 18 and 30 from countries with significant jihadist networks, with that list of countries to be determined by the DoD, the CIA and State. No probationary Z visas under Section 601(h) would issue to such illegals. A special visa could issue, but one that required special care in the background checks and special restrictions on the movement of such applicants until after their background checks were complete.
(2) Construction of at least half of the double-fencing prior to the issuance of a single probationary visa, and completion of all 800+ miles of the double fencing prior to the issuance of any 4 year Z visa or any Y visa.
(3) Acceleration of the six-year build-up in the authorized level of Border Patrol agents so that its number of agents reaches 25,000 within 3 years with the funding for their hiring in place. This should be another hard trigger.
(4) A detailed statement of how and by whom the millions of background checks and interviews called for by the act are to be done, with funding authorized and allocated to support such obligations. This should also be a trigger.
(5) A set of easy to read ceilings on Y visas which cannot be raised except by Congressional directive.
(6) The elimination of social security credits for years worked as an illegal, and the payment --perhaps over a term of years-- of at least 50% of unpaid back taxes
(7) This may seem odd, but I believe the employer penalties for record-keeping violations should be struck from the bill. The burden-shifting to business of enforcing the immigration laws is going to be large in any event, but to impose on businesses the absurd paperwork completion and storage requirements --backed by a $1,000 per incident fine-- empowers bureaucrats to punish any employer they take a disliking to. Keep Mike Nifong in mind when you consider how abusive such a requirement could be made to be even for employers who cannot be shown to have employed a single illegal alien.
The beauty is - they make sense, they are easy to understand - and they don't take up 1000 pages. SENATORS please take note.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
8:44 PM
I know that Senator Grumpy (or Senator Cranky or Senator Wise-Guy or whoever he fancies himself today) believes he's God's gift to us on the immigration issue. So much so that he feels it appropriate to tell fellow colleagues - both in his party, and on a fellow border state to F--- themselves if they happen to have a question about the validity of his "let's give away the store" amnesty program.
Today he was no doubt attempting to spin his way out of his particularly huge image crisis by hosting a conference call with bloggers.
And in doing so he showed even more contempt - both for his political party and ALL Americans who feel concerned about the wisdom of granting immediate and mass amnesty for 20 million people who have broken our laws.
And in his ill tempered manner he attacked Mitt Romney who has clearly benfitted from his immediate condemnation of the bill and issued even more more clear statement: "No Amnesty Period!"
You can hear the contempt that McCain has for everyone who disagrees with him in the actual audio cut.
Kudos to my buddy Ryan Sager of the NY Sun who had the guts to ask McCain the question.
It is just such a shame that John McCain is literally evaporating his candidacy. Many have concluded that he is toast. Many more agree.
It is important to point out that 74% of Republicans and 65% of Democrats disagree with John McCain's position on border security and shamnesty.
It's too bad the Senator is personally too dense to realize that the people who hired him have vetoed his plan of action.
Very, very, sad!
Monday, May 21, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
11:54 AM
Two names are being given the collective nod in the current fiasco that is the GOP's participation in the current AMNESTY legislation that the Senate begins debating today.
Mitt Romney was the savvy candidate, immediately condemning what was known of the measure as early as last Friday. Over the weekend he repeated his crystal clear position that the Z-Visa is amnesty, the immediate granting of temporary status to the 12-20 million illegals that are here is amnesty, and giving them unlimited(F-You) type of renewals and appeals IS amnesty. Mitt's position: "No Amnesty - PERIOD!"
Fred Thompson is the other winner. Long before the debate around this specific bill Big Fred was already talking common sense - on the side of the People - in this issue that some would like to complicate:
After the bill's substance began to leak, Thompson kept sounding like the plain talking - straight forward man that he is.
The loser's are going down... McCain most notably for taking the extra effort to insult fellow Senators - especially those whose views replicate 74% of Republican voters and 64% of Democrats.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
8:16 AM
Last week Zogby showed it... but come on - it was Zogby.
But today there is a whole'lotta stuff that the Romney camp is going to like in this report:
30% of overall support by likely GOP caucus voters. (McCain/Giuliani around 15% each)
55% of likely GOP caucus voters in the 55+ age group. (Caucus voters tend to be older.)
74% favorability vs. 13% unfavorability.
And one can only wonder how his very clear - "No Amnesty Period!" - position statement is going to resonate.
Monday, May 21, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
7:51 AM
From the Atlanta Journal Constitution:
Delegates to the state Republican convention unleashed a rare chorus of boos and hisses at U.S. Sen. Saxby Chambliss on Saturday, as he spoke up for a bipartisan immigration reform package unveiled in Washington this week.
Chambliss had just finished emphasizing his devotion to border security provisions contained in the measure, and brought up agriculture’s need for temporary, foreign workers.
“We’ve got to face the fact that we’ve got to create a new, truly temporary worker program” — the boos started here, but Chambliss plowed on — “for that segment of our economy that need temporary workers.
“If we don’t have a meaningful, workable program, we’ll simply be dependent on foreign imports for food products, the way we’re dependent on foreign imports for oil products,” Chambliss said, finishing his thought.
After the speech, Chambliss said he took the crowd’s reaction as a lack of popular understanding of the shape of the current immigration system.
WRONG Senator Saxby- the American people - including those who served up the audible facial to you - are seeing that you and other Amnesty apologists have a lack of popular understanding of the legitimate concerns of the current national security issue.
You can hear the reaction by listening to the wave audio file here...
Monday, May 21, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
7:34 AM
You had to know that with the "third rail" emotion that Amnesty tends to sizzle with in GOP ranks that the discontent would happen to show itself sooner rather than later.
Romney is emerging as the clear winner on the issue. His consistency on message is getting through: "No Amnesty - period!" And he clearly sees that the endlessly renewable Z-Visa (cleverly named to trick the American people into thinking it means "back of the line") is in actuality an A-Visa. "A" standing for Amnesty. Such clear thinking earned Romney standing ovations.
They also earned Lindsay Graham a chorus of "Boos." And just remember it this way - how people respond to Lindsay Graham is how they feel about John McCain. The two have been inseperable since McCain ran in South Carolina in 2000.
It is clear - the people of America - but especially the core voters for the GOP primary do not like the Bush-McCain-Kennedy Amnesty plan for Illegal Aliens act of 2007. It's time to scrap it, and start from scratch - and this time - listen to the people who hired you!
Monday, May 21, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
7:12 AM
Of all the reasons I've heard that have led me to hate this single attempt at granting Amnesty for Aliens, one I've not heard a great deal about hit me while I was laying in bed just waking up a few minutes ago.
If we haven't been able to enforce the very few limited laws we have on the books already as it pertains to the national security of our borders, how will it be possible to enforce all the tiny aspects of this new legislation?
It seems to me that when you write new laws to try to make up the gap that is left from not enforcing previous laws - that you've already lost the battle.
Now that the bill is online, feel free to work your way through it, and thank NZ Bear for leaving us the ability to comment on it section by section.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
5:32 PM
My new column takes an in depth look at the connection between those seeking the democratic nomination for president and the monetary endorsement they receive from those who make their living by degrading and abusing women. All that plus a tribute and homage to Halpert and Schrute:
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
4:20 PM
This salty exchange followed a mere attempt by a good and decent man Texas Senator John Cornyn - who himself has to wrestle with illegal immigration in his home state as well - attempted to ascertain some clarity on the number of appeals illegals would have in the new bill. During a meeting Thursday on immigration legislation, McCain and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) got into a shouting match when Cornyn started voicing concerns about the number of judicial appeals that illegal immigrants could receive, according to multiple sources -- both Democrats and Republicans -- who heard firsthand accounts of the exchange from lawmakers who were in the room. At a bipartisan gathering in an ornate meeting room just off the Senate floor, McCain complained that Cornyn was raising petty objections to a compromise plan being worked out between Senate Republicans and Democrats and the White House. He used a curse word associated with chickens and accused Cornyn of raising the issue just to torpedo a deal. Things got really heated when Cornyn accused McCain of being too busy campaigning for president to take part in the negotiations, which have gone on for months behind closed doors. "Wait a second here," Cornyn said to McCain. "I've been sitting in here for all of these negotiations and you just parachute in here on the last day. You're out of line." McCain, a former Navy pilot, then used language more accustomed to sailors (not to mention the current vice president, who made news a few years back after a verbal encounter with Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont). "[Expletive] you! I know more about this than anyone else in the room," shouted McCain at Cornyn.
McCain is an ill-tempered, arrogant, obnoxious windbag... and one not fitting to be President!
Friday, May 18, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
2:19 PM
Ray Pritchard's newest best-selling book makes the case...

Buy it, read it...
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
9:06 PM
That's the number (and counting) of TownHall commenters who are teeing off on the new AMNESTY bill that Bush, Senate Dems are forcing down our throats...
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
8:48 PM
I know its not what he said literally but he may as well have announced his withdrawal from the race...
McCain called the new proposal ``a first step but important step in moving forward with comprehensive overall immigration reform,'' said McCain. He said the measure would ``put employers on notice that the practice of hiring illegal workers will no longer be tolerated.''
``This will restore the rule of law,'' said Specter. He called the agreement ``the best I think that can be done,'' though he predicted, ``No matter what we craft, it's going to be attacked both from the right and the left.''
Yet all we heard was, "I am trying with all my heart to lose this race..."
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
8:00 PM
Tonight is the night... will Jim finally dump Karen and find his true soulmate with Pam? Aside from Al Qaeda entering our country because of John McCain - what more important question could be asked?
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
3:44 PM
As Deano mentioned yesterday... it IS Zogby... and the tiny nature of the lead in Iowa was not that impressive, but in New Hampshire its quite a different story:
Romney: 35% Giuliani: 19% McCain: 19%
As I predicted a few days ago... ideas lead the way, and Romney's most recent ad, "I Like Vetos!" is the kind of thing that voters of every stripe will resonate with.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Posted by:
Kevin McCullough
at
8:34 AM
I observed in my Sunday column that Rudy is alienating the single most important group of voters to win the GOP primary. Rudy's unrepentant commitment to all the wrong sides of every social issue - family, kids, guns - the fallout is starting to show.
Dr. James Dobson explains his issue:
True to form, liberal pundits loved Rudy's Houston speech. Some praised him for being "brave" and "historic." In what sense, pray tell? I see nothing courageous about trying to have it both ways in the name of political ambition. He told the crowd he is "firmly committed" to marriage remaining legally defined as the union of one man and one woman. However, he opposed the Marriage Protection Amendment when it was being considered by Congress. Giuliani must have known then, and surely understands now, that the courts have taken dead aim at the institution of marriage, and that the only way to secure it is with a federal constitutional amendment. But the tap dancing continues.
This self-styled defender of marriage says he is "proud" of having submitted, as New York's mayor, a bill creating "domestic partnerships" for homosexual couples. Admittedly, many liberal Americans will agree with the social positions espoused by Giuliani. However, I don't believe conservative voters whose support he seeks will be impressed. Presidential elections are won or lost by slim margins. Rudy has an uphill slog ahead of him, even though he is the darling of the media.
There are other moral concerns about Giuliani's candidacy that conservatives should find troubling. He has been married three times, and his second wife was forced to go to court to keep his mistress out of the mayoral mansion while the Giuliani family still lived there. Talk about tap dancing. Also during that time, the mayor used public funds to provide security services for his girlfriend. The second Mrs. Giuliani finally had enough of his philandering and, as the story goes, forced him to move out. He lived with friends for a while and then married his mistress. Unlike some other Republican presidential candidates, Giuliani appears not to have remorse for cheating on his wife.
Harry Truman asked, "How can I trust a man if his wife can't?" It is a very good question. Here's another one: Is Rudy Giuliani presidential timber? I think not. Can we really trust a chief executive who waffles and feigns support for policies that run contrary to his alleged beliefs? Of greater concern is how he would function in office. Will we learn after it is too late just what the former mayor really thinks? What we know about him already is troubling enough.
One more question: Shouldn't the American people be able to expect a certain decorum and dignity from the man who occupies the White House? On this measure, as well, Giuliani fails miserably. Much has been written in the blogosphere about his three public appearances in drag. In each instance, he tried to be funny by dressing like a woman. Can you imagine Ronald Reagan, who loved a good joke, doing something so ignoble in pursuit of a cheap guffaw? Not on your life.
My conclusion from this closer look at the current GOP front-runner comes down to this: Speaking as a private citizen and not on behalf of any organization or party, I cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008. It is an irrevocable decision. If given a Hobson's – Dobson's? – choice between him and Sens. Hillary Clinton or Barrack Obama, I will either cast my ballot for an also-ran – or if worse comes to worst – not vote in a presidential election for the first time in my adult life. My conscience and my moral convictions will allow me to do nothing else.
|