Oprah Winfrey introduces her good friend, Senator Barack Obama, to Des Moines, Iowa. December 8, 2007.
The Mike Huckabee Immigration Plan…
The Mike Huckabee Immigration Plan…
The Secure America Plan A 9-Point Strategy for Immigration Enforcement and Border Security
Overview: Implement a broad-based strategy that commits the resources of the federal government to the enforcement of our immigration laws and results in the attrition of the illegal immigrant population.
1. Build the Fence
- Ensure that an interlocking surveillance camera system is installed along the border by July 1, 2010.
- Ensure that the border fence construction is completed by July 1, 2010.
2. Increase Border Patrol
- Increase the number of border patrol agents.
- Fully support all law enforcement personnel tasked with enforcing immigration law.
3. Prevent Amnesty
- Policies that promote or tolerate amnesty will be rejected.
- Propose to provide all illegal immigrants a 120-day window to register with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement and leave the country. Those who register and return to their home country will face no penalty if they later apply to immigrate or visit; those who do not return home will be, when caught, barred from future reentry for a period of 10 years.
4. Enforce the Law on Employers
- Employment is the chief draw for most illegal immigrants and denying them jobs is the centerpiece of an attrition strategy.
- Impose steep fines and penalties on employers that violate the law.
- Institute a universal, mandatory citizenship verification system as part of the normal hiring process.
- Prevent the IRS and the Social Security Administration from accepting fraudulent Social Security numbers or numbers that don’t match the employees’ names.*
5. Establish an Economic Border
- Move toward passage of the FairTax.
- The FairTax provides an extra layer of security by creating an economic disincentive to immigrate to the U.S. illegally.
6. Empower Local Authorities
- Promote better cooperation on enforcement by supporting legislative measures such as the CLEAR Act, which aims to systematize the relationship between local law and federal immigration officials.
- Encourage immigration-law training for police. Local authorities must be provided the tools, training, and funding they need so local police can turn illegal immigrants over to the federal authorities.
7. Ensure Document Security
- End exemptions for Mexicans and Canadians to the US-VISIT program, which tracks the arrival and departure of foreign visitors. Since these countries account for the vast majority of foreigners coming here (85 percent), such a policy clearly violates Congress’ intent in mandating this check-in/check-out system.
- Reject Mexico’s “matricula consular” card, which functions as an illegal-immigrant identification card.
8. Discourage Dual Citizenship
- Inform foreign governments when their former citizens become naturalized U.S. citizens.
- Impose civil and/or criminal penalties on American citizens who illegitimately use their dual status (e.g., using a foreign passport, voting in elections in both a foreign country and the U.S.).
9. Modernize the Process of Legal Immigration
- Eliminate the visa lottery system and the admission category for adult brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens.
- Increase visas for highly-skilled and highly-educated applicants.
- Expedite processing for those who serve honorably in the U.S. Armed Forces.
- Improve our immigration process so that those patiently and responsibly seeking to come here legally will not have to wait decades to share in the American dream. Governor Huckabee has always been grateful to live in a country that people are trying to break into, rather than break out of.
*This policy will be drafted to comply with the final federal court decisions on this issue.
Note: This plan is partially modeled on a proposal by Mark Krikorian, Executive Director of the Center for Immigration Studies. (“Re: Immigration: Ten Points for a Successful Presidential Candidate,” National Review, May 23, 2005.)
Hugh Hewitt in the tank for Mitt Romney?
Townhall.com blogger and nationally syndicated talk show host Hugh Hewitt has gotten into some hot water with his fellow conservative bloggers for a statement he made in response to Mitts religion speech. This opening statement is the one in question:
Mitt Romney’s “Faith in America” speech was simply magnificent, and anyone who denies it is not to be trusted as an analyst.
Fellow TownHall.com blogger Kevin McCullough responded with offense, headlining, Hugh Hewitt labels Fred Barnes, Mary Katharine Ham, Byron York, Bill Bennett, Jonah Goldberg, Ramesh Ponnuru, Kevin McCullough: UNTRUSTWORTHY!.
Hugh – that’s simply ridiculous! ALL of the pundits above said something in a major or minor way that was negative/critical of the speech. It wasn’t Mitt at his best. But it wasn’t a big negative either.
Whereas his speech at Values Voters was brilliant both in tone and depth. In fact Mitt got greater response at Values Voters than Huckabee – who was in fact THE evangelical at THE evangelical event!
And as I pointed out in my very MILD critique of what I believed to be the weak spot in the speech you hard core partisans had better stop the “you can’t be trusted if you disagree with me” or “you should vote only based on this criteria” or “you’re a big fat poopie-head” stuff.
For the record – I have NOT endorsed a candidate – and am STILL not sure I’ve even decided upon one.
I don’t take it well when I’m told that I’m a less trustworthy observer of events than someone else – merely because I didn’t see it through the same glasses as someone who is at best – a tad bit beholden to the candidate in question…
Tom Bevan (whoever that is) also responded in a Time.com post saying:
I guess I’ll have to stop listening to or reading Bill Bennett, John Podhoretz, and David Frum, since they can no longer be trusted.
As I wrote earlier, though I don’t know how much it will help him in the end, I thought Romney’s speech came off well – as did many other folks. But the idea that anyone who disagrees with this opinion or doesn’t prostrate themselves before the greatness of Mitt Romney’s oratory is absurd.
Indeed, the one person who cannot be trusted as an analyst these days is Hugh himself, who has taken his Romney boosting to surreal heights by posting press releases from the Romney campaign verbatim on his blog, constantly slagging every one of Romney’s opponents, suggesting criticism of Romney on the right is rooted in anti-Mormon bigotry, declaring victory in every debate, and just generally being so in the tank for the guy that it’s hard to take him seriously at all any more.
Some small fact checking: Hewitt has gone to lengths to “debunk” anti-Mormanism coming from the right (claiming it is a mostly leftist attack)
Kucinich/Paul 2008? Dennis says its possible…
It’s official. Democrat Dennis Kucinich has confirmed the news his wife leaked last week, that if he wins the nomination, he might pick Republican Ron Paul to be his vice president.
The choice makes perfect sense really. Dennis is for bigger government, higher taxes, is pro-abortion rights, anti-gun and anti-war (favoring immediate withdrawal from Iraq) and Ron Paul is for massive cuts in government, abolishing most taxes, is pro-life, pro-gun and anti-war (favoring immediate withdrawal from Iraq). OF COURSE!
When hard left meets hard right, the liberal-libertarian ticket is born…
“I’m thinking about Ron Paul” as a running mate, Kucinich told a crowd of about 70 supporters at a house party here, one of numerous stops throughout New Hampshire over the Thanksgiving weekend. A Kucinich-Paul administration could bring people together “to balance the energies in this country,” Kucinich said.
It would create a stunning, if dizzying, blend of beliefs, wedding two politicians who hold different views on abortion rights, the role of government in providing health care, and the use of government in fostering — or hampering — the public’s greater good. Those are among the reasons it would never work, said a spokesman for Paul, a congressman and doctor from Texas.
“Dr. Paul and Rep. Kucinich are friends and there is a lot of mutual respect,” Paul communications director Jesse Benton said in an e-mail when asked whether a running-mate spot on the Kucinich ticket would be attractive to Paul. “They have worked, and will continue to work, together on the ending the war and protecting civil liberties.
The acknowledgment WAS made that “However, Ron wants to substantially cut the size and scope of the federal government. There are too many differences on issues such as taxes and spending to think a joint ticket would be possible.”
Kucinich and Paul are gadflies to their parties’ establishments. Kucinich challenges Democrats to stop cozying up to corporate interests, while Paul challenges Republicans to shed the trappings of big government.
Both frequently cite the Constitution as providing the authority for their agendas. Paul never votes for legislation unless the measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution, his campaign says. Kucinich keeps a pocket-size copy of the Constitution handy, brandishing it to invoke authority for such proposals as the impeachment of Vice President Cheney, one of Kucinich’s signature issues.
Speculation of a Kucinich-Paul ticket has surfaced on the Internet, where it also has been shot down. But Kucinich’s wife, Elizabeth, did not dismiss it when asked about it after a recent Democratic candidates’ debate in Las Vegas. Speaking to the website RawVegasTV, she called Paul “a great truth-teller,” adding that Paul has “voted 100 percent right on the war.”
Today, her husband said, “Think of how you could unite the country, having a Democrat and a Republican on the ticket.”
GOP Exodus Continues
Can Democrats capitalize on the stampede to the exit door?
For members of Congress, this is the time to get serious about seeking re-election next year or leaving office for something new. So far, only one party is heading for the exits.
While 17 Republicans already have decided to throw in the towel on their Capitol Hill careers, only two Democrats so far are calling it quits — and both of them are seeking higher congressional office. The disparity underscores the different moods prevailing in the two parties: Democrats, still heady from winning control of Congress 2006, are enjoying the fruits of power. Republicans, their party reduced to minority status in the House and Senate, see more allure in retirement or private life.
“I don’t like being in the minority,” said Rep. Ray LaHood, R-Ill., who was first elected in the 1994 GOP landslide and will retire after this term. “It’s not that much fun, and the prospects for the future don’t look that good.”
The wave of retirements compounds the political challenge facing the GOP in the 2008 congressional elections, because the party is significantly trailing its Democratic counterparts in fundraising. That means Republicans will be defending more House and Senate seats with less money and will be fighting battles in places that otherwise would have been secure.
Additionally, many of the Republicans choosing to retire are older, more pragmatic lawmakers, such as Rep. Ralph Regula of Ohio, moderates like Rep. Deborah Pryce of Ohio and Sen. John Warner of Virginia, and mavericks like Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel. These departures fuel the generational and ideological changes that have pushed the Republican contingent in Congress steadily to the right over the past decade.
Eddie Mahe, a former GOP official, said it is no surprise that many Republicans are thinking about quitting politics at a time when President Bush’s popularity is low, Iraq is in turmoil and the U.S. economy might be going soft.
“If I was talking to my favorite brother-in-law and he was thinking about running for Congress, I would say, ‘Why would you want to do that now?’ ” Mahe said. “If anybody’s not smart enough to figure that out, I don’t want them around, anyway.”
Rudy Giuliani Says the United Nations is Ineffective
Senator Obama on The Today Show last year (VIDEO)
Senator Obama interviewed by Meredith Viera on Thursday October 19th, 2006.
Al Gore: The 2008 Election Wild Card
The polls as we speak have painted a picture of a “horse race” that has been etched into the minds of all Americans. The leaders are Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton. Coming in closely behind are John Edwards and Bill Richardson. Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, and Dennis Kucinich trail behind the leaders significantly. And Mike Gravel is unfortunately that angry old man, a curmudgeon, who we have all grown to laugh at as he continues to hang in the race despite his 0% registered support. BUT – there is one catch, however…
Gore does not just play out as a factor in the polls. Right now, he also stands to benefit any of the Democratic candidates greatly. There are many implications, but whoever Al Gore comes out speaking in favor of or “endorsing”, which is what it will be referred to as even if it is not formal endorsement, will see a boost in their poll numbers immediately. Should Gore stand up and say explicitly, “I do not plan to run and instead, I support this Democratic candidate to run”, than supporters of organizations like Draft Gore in 2008 will dissolve, followers of Gore and members of Draft Gore will move to the “next best candidate”, or each one of those followers will examine each candidate and decide who to vote for, which may even lead to many voting for a third party candidate.
Something to take note of is the fact that Al Gore supporters are looking at this race from the outside and critiquing all candidates from the “minor” candidates to the “major” candidates. Primarily, they are examining policies of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. Many are more than likely in fact examining John Edwards and Bill Richardson also. Supporters are taking each of those stances on the issues and each proposed policies and comparing them to Gore so that they can better promote a Gore campaign. And as they come to dislike those candidates more and more and become more hooked on a possible Al Gore run, what happens when he doesn’t run? Do they choose the lesser of two evils and go for a popular major candidate? Or do they vote their conscience and go for a candidate like Dennis Kucinich?
Bottom line: Even after Labor Day, Al Gore is still on the minds of Democrats. He just seems like the guy who should be cleaning up the mess George W. Bush made. And so, some Americans wait and wonder if he will run or who he will endorse. Thus, the deciding factor of this election may not be special interests, corporate interests, or the amount of money one raises. It could be whether Al Gore likes what candidates bring to the table or not. And if that’s so, based on what each Democratic candidate brings, Gore will decide who deserves to lead America into a new and brighter day.