President Bush gave his immigration address tonight. Here are a few reactions:
Hugh Hewitt offers some positive reaction:
President Bush did exactly what he had to do tonight: Hit the middle, agreeing to the fence, to a large increase in Border Patrol personnel and funding, tamper-proof identification, National Guard back-up of ICE for at least a year, the end of catch-and-release, blunt talk on the impossibility of mass deportation, an insistence on English, and a commitment to a guest worker program that will take pressure off enforcement by funneling large numbers of immigrant workers into the legal line.
Dan Riehl says President Bush ensured his irrelevance on this issue:
Unfortunately, visitors to a Bush ’43’ Library may have to cross the border into Mexico to take it all in. In a speech which was as much a eulogy for the so-called Reagan Revolution, as it was an unfortunate beginning to a pending political battle on immigration, President Bush all but declared himself irrelevant to the conversation. In essence, the sitting President of the United States through up his hands and declared, “No mas.”
Sure to be a tremendous disappointment to the majority of center right and conservative Americans, they could easily come to see themselves as leaderless on domestic issues for the next two years. And perhaps they are.
Greg Tinti has the video of Bush’s address and says the speech will not have any effect on immigration in the long term:
Before I say anything about the speech itself, I think it’s important to acknowledge that it will have little to nada long term impact on the immigration debate. It’s good that the President addressed the immigration issue in a prime time speech, but it certainly wasn’t the result of a want to do so. Pressure from the President’s base necessitated it and I know that despite the speech, many are still angry about the President’s position on the issue.
Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) has the best comments of the night:
“President Bush made one step forward and one step backward during tonight’s address. I am encouraged by his plan to increase our security by positioning National Guard troops on the border. This will provide essential — but temporary — security along our porous and vulnerable borders. The better alternative is to enact a comprehensive border security program by constructing fences, bolstering our border patrols and improving our surveillance capabilities.” “I strongly disagree with the President’s call for a guest worker program. A guest worker program is nothing more than amnesty wearing make-up –it’s easier to look at, but just as ugly underneath. The simple truth is that is that if you break the law to come to this country, you will not respect it once you’re here.”
Drudge is reporting that CNN cut to President Bush live as he practiced his address. What a lousy stunt.
Congress has authorized up to 10K more border patrol agents & Bush Co has essentially not requested funding for any more agents than 210.
Just like “No child left behind” while 21% of American children live below poverty level and “Clear skies” and “Mission Accomplished” and the rebuilding of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast, Bush is pure B.S.
The Chimp apparently thinks that “Monkey say is monkey do.”
Hugh Hewitt is becoming as predictable as the moonbat left – Bush could come out wearing a sombrero, waving a Mexican flag and screaming “viva la raza!” and Hugh would be waxing rhapsodic about how is was just the perfect way to describe the perfect plan. I’m as conservative as they come but Hugh Hewitt has as much credibility as quoting Noam Chomsky.
I’ve waited awhile to think and then I also read a few blogs on the speech tonight. Here’s my take:
First, I wasn’t impressed with the speech at all. I think the President’s delivery was mechanical and rehearsed. His expression never changed during the whole thing!
Second, I didn’t hear any support for a border fence. I heard about putting a fence up in places and I heard about using some technology on the border, but that was it.
Thirdly, I didn’t hear any thing new. It was the same ol’ same ol’. My big question is: Why should I trust the federal government to enforce ANY new laws or programs, or to keep the border secure now when it has failed so miserably up to this point on both accounts? Yet, that seems to be what the President is proposing! “Trust us this time!” Well, put the damn wall up, support the Border Patrol we already have and let them do their jobs, and then talk to me about trust!
My only hope now is that the House will hold the course and maybe enough heat will be put on the Senate that we might actually get something done. But, with our gutless Republicans in charge of the Senate, I seriously doubt it. While I will vote Republican, simply because the Democrats scare the hell out of me, I’ll be holding my nose. However, I won’t be sending ANY money to the RNC in particular or to any candidate who isn’t strong on the border fence and strict enforcement.
I was going to make a similar comment as IE View when I saw your first entry, “What else is Hugh Hewitt going to offer?”. The best skewering of Hugh is still Hubris’ review of a shit sandwich during the Harriet Miers debacle. Although View does good with the picture of Bush wearing a sombrero and Hugh praising it.
The trouble with Hugh is that he is a Republican first and a conservative further down the line. Sure it’s good to support a party so it stays in power, but if that party strays from its ideals, what good is it having it in power?
The speech was junk.
The economic cost of naturalizing illegals is astronomic and catastrophic. They’ll bring every parent, cousin pal and in-law into the country via chain immigration. Then we’ll have to support all those people via welfare. That’s about 40 million more people to support. The newly naturalized, working the “jobs Americans won’t do” cannot possibly make enough money to support them themselves. Thus the burden will fall on those of us who work.
It is estimated that under the Hagel-Martinez plan, there will be 200 million additional Mexicans in the US in 20 years.
Democrats will demand that “guest workers” be paid minimum wage, ending the so-called “cheap labor” advantage, which in truth is nothing more than a tax benefit to the employers of illegals.
And politicians, bent on currying the short-term vote, will burn the future of the country.
Think there’s a problem with social security now? Just wait until we add everyone in Mexico.
Drudge is right ! I happened to be perusing CNN to grace them with My presence, and they cut to Bush starting to speak earlier then advertised and then the camera Flip Flopped and they went back to the usual idiots blithering their usual nonsensical ranting! Mak were You behind this?I know how You despise the Chimpy looking Frat Boy!
Sorry- typo- it’s only 100 million more mexicans in 20 years. I feel much better.
Drudge is reporting that CNN cut to President Bush live as he practiced his address. What a lousy stunt.
Well I guess maybe you shouldn’t accept everything Drudge posts as true. NBC accidentally cued the feed early.
I’m looking forward to doing the math — taking the $1.9 Billion spent to throw the right-wing dog pack a “we’ll secure our border” bone — and dividing that by the increased number of illegals turned away.
We’ll only measure the net increase which results from the expenditure of the additional $1.9 Billion.
Who knows the number of illegal crossings from Mexico into the U.S. last year?
1. Hugh Hewitt has changed his mind. Check his website.
2. The catch and release thing ONLY applies to OTMs: Other than Mexicans.
3. The National Guard troops are going to be at the border for ONLY two weeks at a time when they’re doing their annual training. So “up to” 6,000 soldiers come in, settle down, unpack, pack, and move on out.
4. It’s a basic principle of the US military that all jobs that don’t absolutely require a soldier be contracted out. Since the NG troops won’t actually be making arrests and only building roads, barricades, fences, operating UAVs and training, then why bother? Why not just hire contractors?
Because it’s a lot easier to reassign NG troops, and thereby reduce the “up to” 6,000 soldier force levels than to fire civilian contractors on a federal contract.
There are many other loopholes. This speech was a travesty.
Catch and release does not apply to OTMs, but it still applies to Mexicans?? Yikes. Is there any confirmation to that?
Overall, it was not enough. Now comes the haggling where he caves on this and that and Congress modifies this and that. Even if we enacted everything he said exactly the way he said it, it would not go far enough.
We need more and easier immigration for skilled foreigners for one thing. Another thing we need is a fence/wall.
Most Americans of both parties have no problem with ‘troops on the border’ while we are dealing with this invasion. (Yes, it is a type of invasion.) Why did he pussyfoot around with putting troops on the border; at least temporarily?
I do not think the president said anything that had not been heard before. I do not think his proposals are going to have a large impact on the problem. Biometric technology for green cards or social security cards are not difficult to replicate. I do want a guest worker program. I cannot understand why many Americans cannot open up their hearts to the Hispanics who have roots here and are now part of our society. The majority of them do assimilate and whether or not they mean to, it is inevitable to pick up an American routine lifestyle and learn the English language. Yes, I fully understand they broke the law, but a large fraction of the United States’ population has also. Whether it be a mere parking ticket or something as extreme as robbery very few adults can say they have a clean record. The difference between Americans and Hispanics breaking the law is that Hispanics suffered while breaking it, and they suffered to get away from horrible economic conditions in oppressive countries. Do not allow more in! Put more security on the boreder. But why deport those who are here? Allow them to pay back for their penalty, but do not make them lose what they have worked for.
I think I’ve had enough. I’m going to become a moonbat. After this speech, moonbats make more sense than GW. Speech=usneekinuget2stay. PITIFUL!! I’m going shopping to buy xtra-strong Alfoil.
*shrug* look at the full transcript of the speech. Instapundit.com’s got a copy.
Exactly *what* additional authority is needed beyond what is already available under a couple dozen different statutes?
Is this a loophole that allows Bush to squirm out of the deal if Congress declines to fully fund his new detention centers?
And just on FoxNews! The senate has come to an agreement that would allow CONVICTED FELON ALIENS to remain in the US if there would be evidence of hardship if they were deported.
Excuse me while I got pour myself a vodka.
I’m not going to repeat myself on this.
I comment under the name “ed”.
The speech was very clear: from now on, any foreigner willing to go legally in the United States in order to work there will have to communicate his fingerprints while entering the country.They will have to subject themselves to these procedures, formerly only imposed to criminals and to spies, not to immigrants and visitors, and even less to citizens.
Indeed, Bush said in his addresses on Immigration Reform:
“A key part of that system [for verifying documents and work eligibility of aliens] should be a new identification card for every legal foreign worker. This card should use biometric technology, such as digital fingerprints, to make it tamper-proof.”
The proposal launched by president Bush to deploy the National Guard at the Mexican border and to introduce sophisticated electronic devices is only part of a brilliant communication strategy. Its actual function is not to protect the border, but to direct public attention far from the true reform set in motion by the Bush Administration: biometric security.