Why Do conservatives in congress +Bush want the AMNESTY LAW?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

A local talk show guy here in PHX has a theory that they fear a consortium of OPEC retaliations, likely lead by Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, if the flow of money is cut off to Mexico and Central America. Also, a very possible revolution in Mexico. This from Barry Young, of KFYI. He surmises that this could be the only likely line of reasoning by conservatives in government, for backing the immigration/amnesty bill.

[yermom]

that or lots of corporations like the illegals ;)

i'm sure they'd like to do nothing, but enough people are making a big deal out of it.

so they can either do this, or put a lot of corporate types in jail for employing them

i just don't see the latter happening

[thenotman]

I would think it is a realistic solution. I'm no expert but it seems like a lot of time and resources to bus them back.

Plus they like how the large pool of labor drives down wages

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I would think it is a realistic solution. I'm no expert but it seems like a lot of time and resources to bus them back.

Plus they like how the large pool of labor drives down wagesA very high percentage of the conservative voting base is against the amnesty bill. Consequently, the republicans voting for it are signing their quitting congress papers.

[85Sooner]

Certain repubs are siding with the big gov solution. Trent Lott says this is the way to go because doing nothing solves nothing. With this logic we should start killing violent criminals in prison to solve the overcrowding problem because remember doing nothing is worse than doing something even if that thing you do is 100% wrong.

Hey Trent Lott KMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

The simple likelihood that conservative legislators will not get re-electd who vote for the amnesty bill continues to puzzle me about their support for it.

[Ike]

The simple likelihood that conservative legislators will not get re-electd who vote for the amnesty bill continues to puzzle me about their support for it.


While one might hope that this is true, I sincerely doubt it. The rate at which incumbents win elections is still well over 90% these days. I don't see that changing any time soon. Unfortunately.

[thenotman]

So, what is a realistic solution? I don't know. It's an issue I don't follow too close. It would seem rounding up every illegal would take time, money and resources away from homeland security and local law enforcement to the point of neglecting other aspects of their duties. Can't we just hire more border patrol , dig a moat and fill it with pirahna?

[Petro-Sooner]

A WALL. Build it and they won't come.

[yermom]

Don't be puzzled. It's 16 months before any election.

word.

voters have short memories

drop gas by $.25 before elections and everyone will be happy again ;)

[thenotman]

A WALL. Build it and they won't come.

Certainly, but thats not amnesty that everyone is upset about. Have they decided to build it?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

While one might hope that this is true, I sincerely doubt it. The rate at which incumbents win elections is still well over 90% these days. I don't see that changing any time soon. Unfortunately.Ithink most people would agree with your premise, but I contend this is an extremely importasnt issue, that the republican base won't forget. Some legislators voting for amnesty will be reelected, but I'll bet a lot more will be adversely effect than you expect.

[Petro-Sooner]

They passed a bill like last year or so to build a fence over a larger area of the border but only like 13 miles have been built. The US government has sold its people out. They could stop the immigration if it wanted to but obviously they dont give a rats ***. Absolutly sickening.

[Ike]

Ithink most people would agree with your premise, but I contend this is an extremely importasnt issue, that the republican base won't forget. Some legislators voting for amnesty will be reelected, but I'll bet a lot more will be adversely effect than you expect.

I doubt it for a couple of reasons:
a) they have 16 months to send a crapload of pork back to their states. (which helps voters with the forgetting)
b) they have 16 months to kiss *** to the republican party of their state and the republican congressional committee to ensure that they stay in the parties good graces and that no strong candidate runs against them in the primaries. Or if a strong candidate runs, that the State party and the national party steer money to them instead of their opponent.
c) In todays politicking, votes are highly correlated to spending. If they can keep up their "war chest" (which I find to be highly likely), they'll probably fend off any primary challenge.
d) Primaries are where most of these people are likely to lose. Most districts in the country these days are structured to ensure that there aren't a whole lot of competitive districts.

[Octavian]

c) In todays politicking, votes are highly correlated to spending. If they can keep up their "war chest" (which I find to be highly likely), they'll probably fend off any primary challenge.


That's really it. It's the money.


And the vast majority of money in those war chests don't come from "the people." They're placed there by wealthy special interests...business sectors that shape public policy to their self interested benefit. And on this issue, the business wing of the GOP is for it.


There's a lot of talk about "government failing us" but this issue is really being decided like most others. Those who fund the campaigns are probably going to get their way. It happens frequently but it (generally) goes unnoticed by the public at large.


In many policy outcomes that favor the few over the many, the media doesn't give near as much coverage to them because they're not as enticing to viewers and they're convoluted......and/or it's easy for party leaders and the wealthy industries and lobbies in question to camouflage the intent and distort the outcome with multi-million dollar PR campaigns (ie..energy policy, health care policy, economic and tax policy)....but this issue is both sexy for the media and cut & dry for the public. Really no hiding it.


This issue is especially troubling for the GOP structure because it throws a wedge in between its two main wings. And to maybe give an answer to the question of this thread....Many Pub leaders are simply siding with the wealthier (though fewer in numbers) wing which doles out more cheddar.


Massive and strict campaign finance reform would solve so many problems...but that doesn't have a snow ball's chance of happenin.' So....Beinvenidos! ;)

[85Sooner]

Ithink most people would agree with your premise, but I contend this is an extremely importasnt issue, that the republican base won't forget. Some legislators voting for amnesty will be reelected, but I'll bet a lot more will be adversely effect than you expect.


Repubs generally don't forget about issues this big. Remember Bush "no new taxes" etc....

I still predict that the pubs take back congress with a bunch of new members.

[85Sooner]

That's really it. It's the money.


And the vast majority of money in those war chests don't come from "the people." They're placed there by wealthy special interests...business sectors that shape public policy to their self interested benefit. And on this issue, the business wing of the GOP is for it.


There's a lot of talk about "government failing us" but this issue is really being decided like most others. Those who fund the campaigns are probably going to get their way. It happens frequently but it (generally) goes unnoticed by the public at large.


In many policy outcomes that favor the few over the many, the media doesn't give near as much coverage to them because they're not as enticing to viewers and they're convoluted......and/or it's easy for party leaders and the wealthy industries and lobbies in question to camouflage the intent and distort the outcome with multi-million dollar PR campaigns (ie..energy policy, health care policy, economic and tax policy)....but this issue is both sexy for the media and cut & dry for the public. Really no hiding it.


This issue is especially troubling for the GOP structure because it throws a wedge in between its two main wings. And to maybe give an answer to the question of this thread....Many Pub leaders are simply siding with the wealthier (though fewer in numbers) wing which doles out more cheddar.


Massive and strict campaign finance reform would solve so many problems...but that doesn't have a snow ball's chance of happenin.' So....Beinvenidos! ;)


It so happens as the SCOTUS just reversed a big part of the McCain/Feingold bill today. See the new thread.

[SicEmBaylor]

There are two good reasons.

First, the business wing of the GOP wants amnesty because the cheap labor is simply good for business. In some battleground districts, GOP elected officials stay in office purely from the financial support of the business community making it very unlikely they would do anything to **** them off.

Second, Karl Rove many years ago made the legitimate point that the GOP has absolutely got to make inroads with one of the larger minority groups if it wanted to remain electorally viable. He advocated focusing on the hispanic population because they share many of the traditional social beliefs of conservatives namely faith in God, family, etc. Therefore, the GOP is desperate now to fulfill that plan of remaining electorally viable by pandering to the hispanic community.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I doubt it for a couple of reasons:
a) they have 16 months to send a crapload of pork back to their states. (which helps voters with the forgetting)
b) they have 16 months to kiss *** to the republican party of their state and the republican congressional committee to ensure that they stay in the parties good graces and that no strong candidate runs against them in the primaries. Or if a strong candidate runs, that the State party and the national party steer money to them instead of their opponent.
c) In todays politicking, votes are highly correlated to spending. If they can keep up their "war chest" (which I find to be highly likely), they'll probably fend off any primary challenge.
d) Primaries are where most of these people are likely to lose. Most districts in the country these days are structured to ensure that there aren't a whole lot of competitive districts.Your points are good, but I think the amnesty bill is big enough to overcome these forces. Some voting for amnesty will be beaten in the primaries, and some in the general election, by republicans just refusing to vote for them.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

There are two good reasons.

First, the business wing of the GOP wants amnesty because the cheap labor is simply good for business. In some battleground districts, GOP elected officials stay in office purely from the financial support of the business community making it very unlikely they would do anything to **** them off.

Second, Karl Rove many years ago made the legitimate point that the GOP has absolutely got to make inroads with one of the larger minority groups if it wanted to remain electorally viable. He advocated focusing on the hispanic population because they share many of the traditional social beliefs of conservatives namely faith in God, family, etc. Therefore, the GOP is desperate now to fulfill that plan of remaining electorally viable by pandering to the hispanic community.There aren't enough employers who back the cheap labor to overcome the throng that will vote against those amnesty voters at the next election, IMO.
I think your second point is wrong, in that any repub legislator is fooling himself to think the illegals will be voting for republicans, since you can't out-democrat a real democrat.

[Harry Beanbag]

Once again, politicians only care about getting reelected, not what's best for the country. I hate 'em all.

[Ike]

Your points are good, but I think the amnesty bill is big enough to overcome these forces. Some voting for amnesty will be beaten in the primaries, and some in the general election, by republicans just refusing to vote for them.


I hope you are right...not because I hate the bill and want to see all these guys out of there, but because I'd personally like it a little more if it were a bit harder to win re-election in this country. (I'd like to see incumbent victory rates at around 50% personally...nowhere close to the high 90's that they are now).

I still disagree that it will happen, but I will be pleasantly surprised if it does.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I hope you are right...not because I hate the bill and want to see all these guys out of there, but because I'd personally like it a little more if it were a bit harder to win re-election in this country. (I'd like to see incumbent victory rates at around 50% personally...nowhere close to the high 90's that they are now).

I still disagree that it will happen, but I will be pleasantly surprised if it does.I just hope there are conservatives who challenge and beat the rinos in the primaries. Most of the new conservatives who win office usually stay conservative for a couple of terms, before pork-barrel spending and other abusive behaviour get the better of them.

[AlbqSooner]

And to maybe give an answer to the question of this thread....Many Pub leaders are simply siding with the wealthier (though fewer in numbers) wing which doles out more cheddar.
Hmmm so when the Dems talk about wanting to redistribute the wealth they are actually saying they want to cut the cheese?:D

[SicEmBaylor]

There aren't enough employers who back the cheap labor to overcome the throng that will vote against those amnesty voters at the next election, IMO.
I think your second point is wrong, in that any repub legislator is fooling himself to think the illegals will be voting for republicans, since you can't out-democrat a real democrat.

My second point isn't wrong at all since Karl Rove has publicly spoken on this point several times, and it's well known throughout the party that the GOP needs to focus on appealing to Hispanics as part of the Rove plan to win them over and keep the GOP electorally viable. There's no mystery or ambiguity here. It's well known fact.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

My second point isn't wrong at all since Karl Rove has publicly spoken on this point several times, and it's well known throughout the party that the GOP needs to focus on appealing to Hispanics as part of the Rove plan to win them over and keep the GOP electorally viable. There's no mystery or ambiguity here. It's well known fact.Voting for amnesty is the political death warrant for any repub politico. Short and (not so) sweet. One must appeal to hispanics without total alienation of the conservative base.

[Scott D]

Rushypoo, why do you hate a society based on Capitalism and Free Enterprise?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Rushypoo, why do you hate a society based on Capitalism and Free Enterprise?OK, you can explain yourself. Besides, I'm voting Obama.

[Scott D]

OK, you can explain yourself. Besides, I'm voting Obama.

obviously you hate America, since you hate the pure Capitalism and Free Enterprise that drives our Government. Supply and Demand my good man....supply and demand.

[Harry Beanbag]

obviously you hate America, since you hate the pure Capitalism and Free Enterprise that drives our Government. Supply and Demand my good man....supply and demand.


Well, Bill did say he was reregistering as a Democrat. http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/images/icons/kerry.gif;)

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

obviously you hate America, since you hate the pure Capitalism and Free Enterprise that drives our Government. Supply and Demand my good man....supply and demand.Further amplification and clarification would be nice, here.

[Scott D]

*sigh* Rushypoo, what do they have to gain by pushing so hard for that Amnesty Law? In what ways do they seem to personally have a stake in the matter?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

*sigh* Rushypoo, what do they have to gain by pushing so hard for that Amnesty Law? In what ways do they seem to personally have a stake in the matter?You think it's about bribes, eh? Can't say you are wrong. But, they are miscalculating the degree of anger of the conservative base on this issue, IMO.

[CUinNC]

There are two good reasons.

First, the business wing of the GOP wants amnesty because the cheap labor is simply good for business. In some battleground districts, GOP elected officials stay in office purely from the financial support of the business community making it very unlikely they would do anything to **** them off.

Second, Karl Rove many years ago made the legitimate point that the GOP has absolutely got to make inroads with one of the larger minority groups if it wanted to remain electorally viable. He advocated focusing on the hispanic population because they share many of the traditional social beliefs of conservatives namely faith in God, family, etc. Therefore, the GOP is desperate now to fulfill that plan of remaining electorally viable by pandering to the hispanic community.

Dayum, for once I'm listening to ya...got the other layers of this mess down? did ya do the reading on this weeks WP articles on the Admin?
seriously, there are other elements, and it may not be a good thing..

[Scott D]

You think it's about bribes, eh? Can't say you are wrong. But, they are miscalculating the degree of anger of the conservative base on this issue, IMO.

no not bribes, keep working. Feel free to call EIB HQ if you need assistance.

[usmc-sooner]

this is one issue the Republicans are making a huge mistake. I wish President Bush would be as passionate about other issues as he is in passing an amnesty bill that about 70% of the people don't want.

[Big Red Ron]

There are two good reasons.

First, the business wing of the GOP wants amnesty because the cheap labor is simply good for business. In some battleground districts, GOP elected officials stay in office purely from the financial support of the business community making it very unlikely they would do anything to **** them off.

Second, Karl Rove many years ago made the legitimate point that the GOP has absolutely got to make inroads with one of the larger minority groups if it wanted to remain electorally viable. He advocated focusing on the hispanic population because they share many of the traditional social beliefs of conservatives namely faith in God, family, etc. Therefore, the GOP is desperate now to fulfill that plan of remaining electorally viable by pandering to the hispanic community.This line of thought began with Lee Atwater's "Big Tent" dogma regarding african americans. If Lee hadn't have died so young, I doubt Clinton ever get's elected and the entire conservative direction would be different.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

no not bribes, keep working. Feel free to call EIB HQ if you need assistance.Rush Limbaugh is My Clone. I haven't heard him advance your theory, whatever it is. I don't know what it is, using my own brain, either.

[Big Red Ron]

Voting for amnesty is the political death warrant for any repub politico. Short and (not so) sweet. One must appeal to hispanics without total alienation of the conservative base.I believe, Master Sun Tzu would be disappointed in your assessment of the "Weather, Terrain and Climate" evaluation on this one my friend.

[Big Red Ron]

Rush Limbaugh is My Clone. I haven't heard him advance your theory, whatever it is. I don't know what it is, using my own brain, either.:confused:

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

:confused::eek: :pop:

[Scott D]

Rush Limbaugh is My Clone. I haven't heard him advance your theory, whatever it is. I don't know what it is, using my own brain, either.

When you find out what the cornerstone of Capitalism, Free Markets, and our Government's interests in both are, feel free to revisit this matter.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

When you find out what the cornerstone of Capitalism, Free Markets, and our Government's interests in both are, feel free to revisit this matter.OK. In the meantime, I might make comments or advance ideas and stuff.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

OK Scott; you think RINO repubs want the amnesty bill to provide a constant flow of cheap labor to American Business. I prolly NEVER would have guessed that as a reason. It doesn't make sense to me because there are WAY too few employers wanting that who would cast enough votes to keep a politician in office.(now, there may be some bribery going on that would sway a politician, but that's another matter than just voting for a supply of cheap labor)

Far greater is the number of repub voters who don't like the invasion, and who are concerned about border security. However, in the face of resounding opposition to the Amnesty Bill, so many of those repub Senators continued to side with it, until the thursday morning cloture vote.

[CUinNC]

heh.....he lost

http://www.thetigernet.com/servlet/JiveServlet/download/2-406613-4536098-39048/images-1-753399.jpg

[Scott D]

OK Scott; you think RINO repubs want the amnesty bill to provide a constant flow of cheap labor to American Business. I prolly NEVER would have guessed that as a reason. It doesn't make sense to me because there are WAY too few employers wanting that who would cast enough votes to keep a politician in office.(now, there may be some bribery going on that would sway a politician, but that's another matter than just voting for a supply of cheap labor)

Far greater is the number of repub voters who don't like the invasion, and who are concerned about border security. However, in the face of resounding opposition to the Amnesty Bill, so many of those repub Senators continued to side with it, until the thursday morning cloture vote.

psst...Rushy, they aren't "bribes" they are officially called "(re)-election campaign contributions", or "special projects" to a certain jurisdiction. Calling them "bribes" would be straight out criminal ;)