Bush and our border speech

[SuperBalla]

Bush called for the short-term deployment of up to 6,000 National Guard troops in a supporting role along the U.S.-Mexico border.

 

"The issue of immigration stirs intense emotions -- and in recent weeks, Americans have seen those emotions on display," Bush said.

 

"In Washington, the debate over immigration reform has reached a time of decision."

 

Bush outlined an approach combining tougher southern border enforcement with a guest-worker program for those "who will do anything to come to America to work and build a better life."

 

"We are a nation of laws, and we must enforce those laws," Bush said. "We are also a nation of immigrants, and we must hold that tradition, which has strengthened our country in so many ways." (Text of speech)

 

In a nod to conservatives in his base calling for a crackdown on illegal immigration, the president conceded that "we do not yet have full control of the border" and called on Congress to fund "dramatic improvements" in manpower and technology along the U.S.-Mexico border. (Watch the political implications of the debate -- 1:43)

 

He also reiterated his opposition to giving illegal immigrants already in the country an "automatic path" to citizenship.

 

But in a nod to America's growing and politically vital Latino population, Bush also made the argument that a guest-worker program is necessary to gain control of the border and relieve the "enormous pressures on our border that walls and patrols alone will not stop."

 

Bush has long championed a guest-worker program that would allow people to enter the United States to fill jobs for which employers can't find enough American workers.

 

Monday night, he offered his most in-depth comments to date on the politically thorny issue of what to do with illegal immigrants already in the country.

 

The Senate resumed debate Monday on immigration legislation that would create a mechanism by which illegal immigrants could proceed toward legal status, and eventual citizenship, by working for a number of years, paying fines, undergoing a background check and learning English.

 

Critics dismiss such a legalization process as "amnesty." Supporters reject that term, insisting the process amounts to "earned citizenship."

 

In his speech, Bush came out against "amnesty," which he defined as giving illegal immigrants "an automatic path to citizenship."

 

It remains unclear if under that definition the Senate's approach would be acceptable to the president.

 

Any form of legalization could be a tough sell to members of Bush's own party, particularly in the House, where lawmakers passed an immigration bill in December that contained neither a worker program nor a legalization process.

 

Critics of a legalization process say it would only encourage more people to cross the border illegally -- and that not enough has been done to increase security in order to stop them.

 

Troops called temporary

Part of Bush's answer to those critics is his proposal to send National Guard troops to serve in a support capacity in four Southwestern states -- California, Texas, New Mexico and Arizona. (Map)

 

The Guard force would remain under state control, although the federal government is expected to pick up the cost.

 

"The Guard will assist the Border Patrol by operating surveillance systems, analyzing intelligence, installing fences and vehicle barriers, building patrol roads and providing training," Bush said.

 

"Guard units will not be involved in direct law enforcement activities --- that duty will be done by the Border Patrol."

 

"This initial commitment of Guard members would last for a period of one year. After that, the number of Guard forces will be reduced as new Border Patrol agents and new technologies come online.

 

"It is important for Americans to know that we have enough Guard forces to win the war on terror, respond to natural disasters, and help secure our border," Bush said.

 

About 350 Guard troops currently are assigned to the border.

 

Active-duty U.S. troops are barred from domestic law enforcement by a Reconstruction-era law known as Posse Comitatus, but National Guard troops under state control can perform some law enforcement functions.

 

Bush's plan to deploy the National Guard along the border has received initial support from both Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid.

 

"On the face of it, I think it is a good idea," said Reid, a Nevada Democrat. "I think that we have to understand that the states can't afford to do this. It's not their responsibility. It's a federal responsibility."

 

Reid also said the National Guard is already stretched thin by deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq, a concern echoed by two prominent Republicans who have questioned the plan -- Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California.

 

The number of Guard troops deployed to Iraq has been cut by more than half, from about 50,000 a year ago to 23,000.

 

News that the National Guard might be deployed along the border also prompted Mexican President Vicente Fox to call Bush on Sunday to express concerns about any possible move to "militarize" the roughly 2,000-mile border between the two countries, according to spokespersons for both leaders.

 

"The United States is not going to militarize the southern border. Mexico is our neighbor, and our friend," Bush said.

 

"We will continue to work cooperatively to improve security on both sides of the border, to confront common problems like drug trafficking and crime, and to reduce illegal immigration."

 

Rep. Silvestre Reyes of Texas, a former Border Patrol officer, sent a letter to the White House warning that the deployment of National Guard troops could be badly received south of the border -- and could result in Mexican voters choosing an anti-American president in their July election.

 

"If that happens, illegal immigration will be the least of our problems," said Reyes, a Democrat. "Mexico is not our enemy, and there is much at stake for both our countries with respect to security, commerce and culture."

 

 

This is a CNN report. What do you think?

[Big F'n Dave]

I think :skins: Yer doing a heckuva job :skins:

[Jimmy Neutron]

Are the Guard folks going to secure the border, or hand out social services applications to Mexicans streaming across the border?

[AtomicCEO]

Everyone look over here!

 

My approval rating isn't in the toilet! The war isn't vastly unpopular and unsuccessful! My top aides aren't being indicted for lying to Federal investigators! I'm not leading a secret organization that spies on everyone!

 

Troops on the border! Look over here!

[Clubfoothead]

It's just amazing how much of a tool this guy is. He can f8ck up anything. Troops on the border good. Amnesty for illegals bad. If the borders can never be truly closed, why add the motivation of amnesty once you get here. That really keeps the Cubans out.

 

[godtomsatan]

I was napping when the speech took place.

 

When I flipped past CNN a few minutes ago, their segment was discussing instant poll results that indicated 42% of the people watching had a mostly positive opinion.

 

Which led me to wonder aloud, with only my cat to hear, is it more important to discuss what he said, or how people feel about what he said?

 

News is stupid. More stupid than the President and his cockamamie solutions to election year created problems.

[SuperBalla]

Are the Guard folks going to secure the border, or hand out social services applications to Mexicans streaming across the border? 

 

1470780[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

 

I hear they are handing out John McCain buttons.

[Skilly]

I saw the first 10 minutes of the speech. Actually sounds like a good idea if congress can agree to put it in action------------which of course will never happen.

 

One thing the Prez never mentioned: how do we keep out those dang Canadians!

[Retrograde assault]

The only reason that goofball (and I voted for him twice) came on tv tonight is because some Americans like me have been rattling the politicians cages for months now. The problem is, this issue is still a non-issue or joke to most Americans and by the time enough people take it serious we will have about 100 million illegal aliens here and then it will be too friggin late.

[Voltaire]

I saw the first 10 minutes of the speech.  Actually sounds like a good idea if congress can agree to put it in action------------which of course will never happen. 

 

One thing the Prez never mentioned:  how do we keep out those dang Canadians!

 

1470954[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Don't need to keep the Canadians out ... they're well educated and are welcome as are Americans there. A lot of Canadians fear coming tho the US because they like their National Health Care plan (no I'm serious).

 

Mexicans, on the other hand, think shoveling sh*t for $4/hour is like striking a gold vein.

[bushwacked]

I saw the first 10 minutes of the speech.  Actually sounds like a good idea if congress can agree to put it in action------------which of course will never happen. 

 

1470954[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Nearly 10,000 border agents were axed during the FY 2005 budget. It seems like pure reactionary BS to me. I'm not sure how putting the National Guard on the Mexican border is really a good idea.

[broncosn05]

Everyone look over here! 

 

My approval rating isn't in the toilet!  The war isn't vastly unpopular and unsuccessful!  My top aides aren't being indicted for lying to Federal investigators!  I'm not leading a secret organization that spies on everyone!

 

Troops on the border!  Look over here!

 

1470895[/snapback]

 

 

 

Yet I still hate the Chargers more

[Retrograde assault]

Nearly 10,000 border agents were axed during the FY 2005 budget.  It seems like pure reactionary BS to me.  I'm not sure how putting the National Guard on the Mexican border is really a good idea.

 

1471053[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Yep, reactionary political rhetoric! "Mexico is our neighbor and our friend". I sure wish we had an ocean between us and our southern neighbor.

[Voltaire]

Now that the GOP isn't marching lock step behind Bush anymore, I'm starting to see vestiges of what the GOP use to be about. The more illegals we have in America, the more downward presure there is on the wages of unskilled labor.

 

I live in China, so I'm not without sympathy. While Preisdent Bush doesn't give two sh*ts about the Mexicans, he's just doing what Tyson Foods and other companies that don't want to pay minimum wage to Americans want him to do. I can understand them wanting to come to the US for the opportunity. Heck I would probably come too. If all you're qualified to do is shovelling sh*t, shoveling sh*t pays 10 times more on the US side ofthe border than in Mexico.

 

In China, i can see what people with next to nothing have and what they're willing to work for. There's no doubt that Mexicans work hard at bad jobs for low pay. But I'd rather see Americans hold those jobs and the lack of competition from illegals would force the employers to pay a decent wage.

 

So the solution is to better police the border, deport ones that break the law, don't automatically grant citizenship to the children of illegal parents, don't subsidize them in the social welfare net. If someone is illegal, has lived and worked in America for a number of years, learned to speak English, I am not without compassion. I think they can be put onto a track for legalization and eventually citizenship. But it's important to stem the inflow first before we solve the problems with those already here.

 

Also, I have no idea why this is the National Guard's responsibility. George W. Bush has no respect for them at all. These people have everyday lives, jobs, and families. They are only supposed to be called up in case of a regional disaster.

 

Bush apparently sees no problem in constantly f*cking with their lives saying "Hey guess what, I know you just got back from wearing the bullseye I put on your back in Iraq and I know you haven't been with your wife or been to your job for a year, but -anyways- I need you for another five months to go chase down Mexicans in BFE Arizona befor I deploy you back to Iraq again."

 

A$$hole.

[sunysteelfly76]

If we use the National Guard to protect our borders who will fight our war(s)?

[Voltaire]

If we use the National Guard to protect our borders who will fight our war(s)?

 

1471230[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

They're not even fighting wars. That's too Oprahing esy. They hunt down insurgents and act as police and security guards in the world's toilet. Standing around, getting bored, waiting for cute 'innocent' kids to come up and blow them up.

Edited May 16, 2006 by Voltaire

[AtomicCEO]

These National Guard troops have no authority to enforce the law or arrest anyone... so they are merely there in a "support" capacity.

 

I, for one, am glad that 6000 of our National Guard troops are fetching coffee for the 300 border patrol agents. That ought to lick this problem.

[Tboogs]

Bush apparently sees no problem in constantly f*cking with their lives saying "Hey guess what, I know you just got back from wearing the bullseye I put on your back in Iraq and I know you haven't been with your wife or been to your job for a year, but -anyways- I need you for another five months to go chase down Mexicans in BFE Arizona befor I deploy you back to Iraq again."

 

A$$hole.

 

1471212[/snapback]

 

 

 

Good points...He has our National Guard out there for "target practice"...trus' me.

The Governors of these "border" States are complaining that they are already stretched thin of Soldiers....

 

Stupid idea!

[MikesVikes]

he's just doing what Tyson Foods and other companies that don't want to pay minimum wage to Americans want him to do.

1471212[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Here is what Tyson foods wants. Keep them away from us.

[Randall]

Are the Guard folks going to secure the border, or hand out social services applications to Mexicans streaming across the border? 

 

1470780[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

They are going to recruit illegals for the military for the upcoming republican wars. They will also rgister republican to vote in November.

 

Nearly 10,000 border agents were axed during the FY 2005 budget.  It seems like pure reactionary BS to me.  I'm not sure how putting the National Guard on the Mexican border is really a good idea.

 

1471053[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Pretty like how thy gutted spending for re-building the levees around New Orleans for years because Clinton put them in. More tax cuts no matter what.

Edited May 16, 2006 by Randall

[SuperBalla]

These National Guard troops have no authority to enforce the law or arrest anyone... so they are merely there in a "support" capacity.

 

 

 

1471358[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are you sure about that? I remember we had to go through classes of riot control, arresting, and some overall protocal. If those troops are federalized and I am sure they are...they can arrest people. They do have MP units in the Guard but I bet they are pulling duty elsewhere. I might be wrong though.

[yo mama]

Are you sure about that? I remember we had to go through classes of riot control, arresting, and some overall protocal. If those troops are federalized and I am sure they are...they can arrest people. They do have MP units in the Guard but I bet they are pulling duty elsewhere. I might be wrong though.

 

1472722[/snapback]

 

 

 

Yeah. We don't need riot control; we need snipers.

[Randall]

After the speech my approval of Bush went up tremendously. From 1-4%.

[SuperBalla]

After the speech my approval of Bush went up tremendously. From 1-4%.

 

1472773[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is long overdue though. We should have had this puppy wrapped up tight if Bush was serious about protecting America. I am for the War on Terror but I swore that soon after the Sept. 11th attacks we would have tried to filter out our population by using the police to scan there driver's license and when someone is flagged for whatever reason they are detained until who they are is confirmed. There wouldn't have been ANY illegal aliens into this country EVER if I would have been Bush. The I would have proceeded with the war.

Edited May 17, 2006 by SuperBalla

[Randall]

This is long overdue though. We should have had this puppy wrapped up tight if Bush was serious about protecting America. I am for the War on Terror but I swore that soon after the Sept. 11th attacks we would have tried to filter out our population by using the police to scan there driver's license and when someone is flagged for whatever reason they are detained until who they are is confirmed. There wouldn't have been ANY illegal aliens into this country EVER if I would have been Bush. The I would have proceeded with the war.

 

1472804[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

 

Of course, but he isn't. His corporate buddies, those donatng to his presidency, like cheap labor.

 

They are also largely responsible for failures of the NAFTA agreement too that made more poverty in Mexico than before it's passage. If it had succeeded(as it was supposed to) in raising wages down there we wouldn't be under attack like we are. Wage requirements should have been part of the agreement.

 

Bush keeps cutting money for border agents. Congress wanted 10,000 agents this year and got money for 210. He isn't serious at all.

 

I saw one of the WH spokeswmen who sad they would give out worker cards and when they expired workers would just go back. Are you kidding me?

 

Now they are talking bio metric ID's and I bet we will pay for them while his corporate buddies profit.

 

Bush is all for cheap labor. Nothing's changed.