Hello:

Speaking about the truth hurting the righty's, catch this:

I was deeply involved in my daily dose of Brit Hume and his cadre of neo-cons, Bill Kristol, Morton Kondrake, and Fred Barns, when I spit my coffee all over the TV. I love those guy's, don't you?

They were talking about Elliot Spitzers about face regarding the issuance of a drivers license to illegals. In the midst of telling us how it would never work politically, and how dumb the Democrats are, Kondrake actually said that the program is WORKING in the states where it has been instigated.

Really, I about choked.

Of course, we can't expect our leaders to actually do something that works now, can we? Especially if he's a Democrat??

excon

Yeah if I was an illegal I'd love to have an official document saying to all who sees it that I am an illegal.

Which states is he talking about .Kondrake is sometimes the contrarian of the panel .Other times it's Juan Williams.

Spitzer did an about face and Hillary a retreat before tonight's debate because his license idea is a dumb one... and everyone can peel away the b.s. to see that they are trying to get their own version of voter fraud for their benefit .

Hello again, tom:

Well, this is problem K, that would be fixed if congress did the job we hired them to do, which is FIX problem A - illegal immigration. ANY solution beyond fixing problem A, is only a stopgap measure and bound to fail.

However, in the face of the congress NOT doing its job, the states are filling in the gaps. What? They shouldn't?

In THIS instance, if you are the state who is charged with providing SAFE highways for your residents, and your job has NOTHING to do with immigration, then I think it's wise to try to get ALL the drivers in your state licensed and insured.

That's what I think. That's what Spitzer thought. And, that's what Kondrake thought.

excon

I think excon is 100% right with his comment. The states feel that they need to fix a problem that is not being addressed properly in congress.

I also think that Spitzer's idea was a good one.

Hello again, tom:

Well, this is problem K, that would be fixed if congress did the job we hired them to do, which is FIX problem A - illegal immigration. ANY solution beyond fixing problem A, is bound to fail.

However, if the face of the congress NOT doing its job, the states are filling in the gaps. What? They shouldn’t?

In THIS instance, if you are the state who is charged with providing SAFE highways for your residents, and your job has NOTHING to do with immigration, then I think it's wise to try to get ALL the drivers in your state licensed and insured.

That's what I think. That's what Spitzer thought. And, that's what Kondrake thought.

excon

Hey, ex. Be careful mixing coffee with electronics--liquid tends to let the smoke out of the wires.

I agree with you: Congress ain't doing diddly about Problem A: Illegal Immigration. We may differ on our solutions, but at least WE can see that it is the source of the problem. Too bad they can't.

And yes, in the absence of federal leadership (on a federal issue, no less) is it really any wonder that the states are scrambling to find some solution, ANY solution?

While I think some of the proposed solutions range from feasible to idiotic, I am less concerned about them than the fact that the feds aren't getting the message that THEIR work is being done by others.

Spitzer's solution was asinine . Here's a lesson for Spitzer and Congress. Listen to the people . If Washington wasn't trying to shove a shamnesty down our throats via closed door backroom dealing ,then they would realize that the people overwhelmingly want the solution to begin with enforcing the existing laws.

Well over 75% of NYers (the bluest of the blue states) opposed his plan and he dare pawn it off on shrill politics . What that demonstrates is the arrogance of the man. If Spitzer feels he has to act because of federal negligence then let him adopt tough anti-illegal immigrant laws to discourage the illegals from settling in the state .

The states and local governments more often then not conclude that the their solution is to offer sanctuary and other acts to inhibit the enforcement of the laws . I say any state that does so should forfeit a share of their homeland security funding .

Hey, ex. Be careful mixing coffee with electronics--liquid tends to let the smoke out of the wires.

I agree with you: Congress ain't doing diddly about Problem A: Illegal Immigration. We may differ on our solutions, but at least WE can see that it is the source of the problem. Too bad they can't.

And yes, in the absence of federal leadership (on a federal issue, no less) is it really any wonder that the states are scrambling to find some solution, ANY solution?

While I think some of the proposed solutions range from feasible to idiotic, I am less concerned about them than the fact that the feds aren't getting the message that THEIR work is being done by others.

I read somewhere that it's also hard to "get snot off of a flat screen moniter." :D

I think the fact that the feds aren't getting the message IS problem A.

In THIS instance, if you are the state who is charged with providing SAFE highways for your residents, and your job has NOTHING to do with immigration, then I think it's wise to try to get ALL the drivers in your state licensed and insured.

Ex, I have to admit to mixed feelings over granting DL's to illegals at the present. A Hispanic woman with no DL and no insurance that spoke very little English rear-ended my wife's car a couple of weeks ago. Don't get me wrong though, my reaction was far from thinking if Texas would only give them DL's it wouldn't be costing me a $250 deductible. :mad:

Spitzer's solution was asinine . Here's a lesson for Spitzer and Congress. Listen to the people Hello again, tom:

If the leadership reigns AREN'T going to be picked up by those who we THOUGHT were leaders, then WE THE PEOPLE will pick them up.

That's the state we find ourselves in. Given that void, the leaders look to the masses for their leadership. Huh? Something is wrong with that equation. They shouldn't be asking us. They should be leading us.

I agree with you absolutely, I think they should listen to me. After all, I'm one of the people. Now, I don't disagree with your percentages of those who agree with my position and those who don't. I'm sure I'm in the minority. That's not the point. The point is, we should have leaders who lead. If we did, the people would follow. Of that, I have no doubt.

I also have no doubt that as long as the leadership vacuum continues, the problem will too. My problem is that I see nothing new on the horizon - nowhere - not even Ron Paul.

excon

A Hispanic woman with no DL and no insurance that spoke very little English rear-ended my wife's car a couple of weeks ago.Hello Steve:

Nuff said.

excon

PS> Stick around. You're my best back up.

Well we all know Spitzer's leadership on this issue. He is a poodle of Evita.

From Hardball last night :


CHRIS MATTHEWS: Do you know if Hillary Clinton had anything to do with Governor Spitzer's decision to do his 180?

FRED ER: Yeah, we believe she did. We were told -- I was told -- at a very high level in New York politics that Mrs. Clinton's campaign or some of her top people signalled to Governor Spitzer's people that he had damaged her. They were wondering what the heck he was up to, why did he bring it to the floor now, and made it clear that the governor was hurting her and he ought to back down if he wanted to help her, which he says he wants to do.

MATTHEWS: Is anybody in his office saying that, or are you getting that from a third party? Is anybody in Spitzer's office saying that the governor got the word from Hillary to cut it?

ER: In his camp, but not his office. But at the highest levels.

MATTHEWS: Well how does it work? Did she send word through New York politicians that it was hurting her?

ER: Well first of all Spitzer's a very smart guy and he's aware of what happened. Secondly, they travel in similar circles. High-level consultants talk with one another. The governor's political consultants and advisors were advised as to the damage that was done here. That's how it was related.

This at the same time that Hillary made this statement


"I support Gov. Spitzer's decision today to withdraw his proposal. His difficult job is made that much harder by the failure of the Congress and the White House to pass comprehensive immigration reform,"... "As president, I will not support drivers licenses for undocumented people and will press for comprehensive immigration reform that deals with all of the issues around illegal immigration, including border security and fixing our broken system."

This on the eve of the next Democrat debate where they both know Hillary's flip-flopping on the subject will again be raised as an issue.

Hello Steve:

Nuff said.

excon

PS> Stick around. You're my best back up.

I'm sure it wasn't intentional :D

You do have one good point about Federal Responsibility

U.S. Constitution, Article 4 Section 4:

"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion"....

You do have one good point about Federal Responsibility

U.S. Constitution, Article 4 Section 4:

"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion"....


So what is your definition of invasion?


Invasion to me is what happened on 9/11. Invasion is what is going on in Iraq. Invasion is not a family trying to make a better life in a new country. If it is then my Irish family invaded America. Shame on them!

You do have one good point about Federal ResponsibilityHello again, tom:

One's better than none.

excon

Tuscany an invasion can be a simple as an uninvited intuder .

Did your Irish relatives bum rush the border ?No... More likely they waited at Ellis Island like my Irish ancestors so they could be properly processed before they were allowed into the country .

So, what does the accident prove?

a) she's illegal and shouldn't be here in the 1st place rear-ending cars

OR

b) once she's here, if she gets a license and mandatory insurance your wife is all set.

Then there's c:

c) could she afford the insurance?

Hmmm - many illegals allow business owners to turn a much higher profit by working hard and charging less and generally going medically uninsured (nevermind car insurance)... I wonder - if we hire - should we insure? This is a tough one.

excon,

What does "working" mean? What are these drivers' licenses for illegal immigrants accomplishing? What did Kondrake mean when he said that it was "working"?

Does working mean that these people now have licenses and nobody challenges their status? Does it mean that we now know who these people are? Does it mean that these illegals are now insured drivers? Does it mean that they are now able to vote and obtain government aid? Does it mean that they now have the ability to get a job for which they are not legally entitled?

Without a clear understanding of what these programs are supposed to accomplish and WHAT OUR GOALS ARE, how can we determine whether a particular program is working or not?

My goal is to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the USA. My goal is to make sure that people who are not supposed to be here aren't being treated the same as people who should be here. My goal is to make sure that people aren't breaking the law. My goal is to not give preferential treatment to criminals over those who obey the laws when they come here.

How do drivers licenses for illegal immigrants accomplish any of these goals? And if they aren't accomplishing any of those goals, then what goals are they accomplishing? What makes anyone say that such a program is "working"? Working for whom? Working to do what?

Elliot

Excon,

What does "working" mean? What are these drivers' licenses for illegal immigrants accomplishing? What did Kondrake mean when he said that it was "working"?

Does working mean that these people now have licenses and nobody challenges their status? Does it mean that we now know who these people are? Does it mean that these illegals are now insured drivers? Does it mean that they are now able to vote and obtain government aid? Does it mean that they now have the ability to get a job for which they are not legally entitled?

Without a clear understanding of what these programs are supposed to accomplish and WHAT OUR GOALS ARE, how can we determine whether a particular program is working or not?

My goal is to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the USA. My goal is to make sure that people who are not supposed to be here aren't being treated the same as people who should be here. My goal is to make sure that people aren't breaking the law. My goal is to not give preferential treatment to criminals over those who obey the laws when they come here.

How do drivers licenses for illegal immigrants accomplish any of these goals? And if they aren't accomplishing any of those goals, then what goals are they accomplishing? What makes anyone say that such a program is "working"? Working for whom? Working to do what?

Elliot
It’s been estimated that there are 1 million illegals’ in New York…what’s the cost of obtaining a license there? Do the math…that’s a bunch of bucks if only half the number coughed up the money.

Another thing that bothers me is that behind the notion is the assumption that illigals’ would buy a license. What purpose would it serve them to pay in order to identify themselves as illegal?

DC,

Ahhh!! So we get to Spitzer's real intention... state revenue in the form of license fees.

And you are right about your second point too... who wants to pay for the ability to identify oneself as an illegal when you can do it for free without a government-issued ID card? And who would pay for car insurance when they can get away without paying for it because they are illegal?

Who would buy what they can get for free?

Elliot

DC,

Ahhh!!! so we get to Spitzer's real intention... state revenue in the form of license fees.

And you are right about your second point too... who wants to pay for the ability to identify oneself as an illegal when you can do it for free without a government-issued ID card? And who would pay for car insurance when they can get away without paying for it because they are illegal?

Who would buy what they can get for free?

Elliot
This brings into question the fairness of the "wet foot/dry foot" policy which provides that any Cuban who sets foot on dry US land has a right to a green card. Actually, Mexicans and nationals from a host of other countries have long cried "foul" on this discriminatory policy.

I am still studying this issue. I am not xenophobic. And history has shown that a nation with closed borders is not a vibrant one... Where dollars go and how is always a hot button issue.

As we all know the line from “The New Colossus,” by the nineteenth-century American poet Emma Lazarus is etched at the base of our own statue of liberty. It's held us in good stead: "Give us your tired, poor, huddled masses..." many illegals, as well know, don't do the jobs many americans would even want to do. They have all not come here just to party - but to work... and that has economic value.

There's 12 million of 'em. And it seems that one group that is hurt the most by them is:

HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS.

Yep. They oughta tar and feather those hard working son of a guns coming over the border... Why?

Most economists agree that the wages of low-skill high-school dropouts are suppressed by somewhere between 3 percent and 8 percent because of competition from immigrants, both legal and illegal. Economists speculate that for the average high-school dropout, that would mean about a $25 a week raise if there were no job competition from immigrants!

Other than them, I would like to have a documented American public. And it appears the White House is going that way with amnesty. But I just don't view it as a crisis... Like say my tax dollars going somewhere else (Iraq) for reasons still unclear.

For one day in Iraq, we could (CONSERVATIVELY) cover the healthcare of over 256,000 American children. Probably more like 400,000. Depending on if you think we are spending 300 or 700 million ($500,00/minute) a day in Iraq.

I think requiring documentation is practical. As for insuring an illegal... Perhaps they oughta stick to bicycles until they get a card and a license :-)

My goal is to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into the USA. Working to do what?Hello again, El:

It depends. I don't disagree with you you. If your goal is to stop illegal immigration, then giving them drivers licenses isn't a good idea.

But, if your concern is highway safety, then one could argue that having a license and being insured IS a good idea.

Last I checked, the governor works for the STATE, not the feds. If MY governor worried more about enforcing federal laws at the expense of my states citizens, I’d throw the bum out.

You and tom sound exactly like someone who's never been hit by an unlicensed and uninsured illegal. Hmmmm. One of your righty friends HAS been hit, and now he's not so sure about that stuff.

It's true. You guy's live with your head in the clouds.

excon

DC

I'm sure Spitzer and co would've started ironing out a plan for the illegals to wave the fees. NY State has motor voter laws . It was his and the Democrats intentions to get as many illegals enfranchised as they can .

Now ;let's say I get plowed into with an illegal who has a license... does that mean the illegal is insured ? What does this illegal forfeit under Spitzer's plan ? A phony license ? This illegal was driving around before this licensed was issued and if the illegal lost the license what would prevent this illegal from driving again?. nothing !

This whole issue is a canard for the true reason Spitzer and Hillary had that I mentioned above .

DC

I'm sure Spitzer and co would've started ironing out a plan for the illegals to wave the fees. NY State has motor voter laws . It was his and the Democrats intentions to get as many illegals enfranchised as they can .

Now ;let's say I get plowed into with an illegal who has a license ...does that mean the illegal is insured ? What does this illegal forfeit under Spitzer's plan ? a phony license ? This illegal was driving around before this licensed was issued and if the illegal lost the license what would prevent this illegal from driving again ? .....nothing !

This whole issue is a canard for the true reason Spitzer and Hillary had that I mentioned above .
Tom, I believe voter fraud was at the heart of the matter.

Interestingly enough, “The city of San Francisco will offer ID cards to all residents, including illegal immigrants. The announcement comes just as New York State is backing off a proposal give illegal immigrant's access to drivers licenses.”

The purpose, according to them is to make “services available to people without identification”. It will be interesting to see if that includes the right to vote.

NPR : San Francisco to Offer Illegal Immigrants ID Cards (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16314490&ft=1&f=1001)

Hello again, El:

It depends. I don't disagree with you you. If your goal is to stop illegal immigration, then giving them drivers licenses isn't a good idea.

But, if your concern is highway safety, then one could argue that having a license and being insured IS a good idea.

Wouldn't getting rid of illegal drivers be a better solution than just handing them licenses? Stop illegal immigration and deport the illegals who are here, and the problem of illegal immigrants driving suddenly becomes a non-issue, doesn't it. In essence, by handling the illegal immigration problem, we will also be improving traffic safety. Two birds with one stone.


Last I checked, the governor works for the STATE, not the feds. If MY governor worried more about enforcing federal laws at the expense of my states citizens, I’d throw the bum out.

What about a governor who tries to enforce his own personal agenda at the expense of 72% of his citizens? How do you feel about that guy? Personally, that's the guy I's want to throw out. On the other hand, a Governor who follows the law instead of trying to follow a personal agenda, especially when following those laws is the desire of more than 70% of his constituents... that seems to be a guy worth keeping. Following the law AND the desires of your citizens? That's a rare opportunity to please everyone. (Except the illegals, of course. But then, if they don't bother following our laws in the first place, why should I give a $h!t what they think?)


You and tom sound exactly like someone who's never been hit by an unlicensed and uninsured illegal. Hmmmm. One of your righty friends HAS been hit, and now he's not so sure about that stuff.

Did you read all of Steve's post? If I remember correctly, he said that the LAST thing he had on his mind was "Boy I wish this guy had a drivers' license". Would a drivers license have prevented the accident? Would it have made the guy who rear-ended Steve's wife a better driver?[/quote]


It's true. You guy's live with your head in the clouds.

Better than living with it buried in the sand, ignoring the overwhelming problems caused by illegal immigration, and hoping that a drivers license will solve those problems. At least we want to attack the problem at the source... the ability of illegals to get across the border in the first place.

You are looking for band-aid solutions for problems that need major surgery. Your band aids don't work. Amnesty, legalization, granting de-facto citizenship... these aren't effective solutions to the problem. They didn't work when the Marielettos came over. They didn't work when the Colombians came over. And they aren't working now either. It's time to try enforcement rather than appeasement.

Elliot

Wouldn't getting rid of illegal drivers be a better solution than just handing them licenses? Stop illegal immigration and deport the illegals who are here, and the problem of illegal immigrants driving suddenly becomes a non-issue, doesn't it....... It's time to try enforcement rather than appeasement.Hello again, El:

Like I said, you guys live with your head in the clouds. I suppose in the cloudy world you live in, deporting 10 - 15 million people WOULD solve the problem.

However, in the REAL world where I live, that ain't going to happen.

I'm interested in discussing REAL world problems with REAL world solutions... But that ain't happening here. You guys are just blinded by your hate of anybody who breaks the law - even if it's a law that you would break yourself. And I DO mean blinded.

excon

PS> Ok, I guess I need to spell it out again.

IF your family was hungry, and the only thing separating you from the help wanted sign on that distant hill is an imaginary line in the sand, you'd cross that line. Yes, you would. I know it, and YOU know it.

But, maybe up there in the clouds...

The world is easier to deal with in black and white... especially if we are fearful or insecure.

Careful there, ex. Yeah, I have mixed feelings over it now, but in about the past 5 years I've been hit twice by uninsured drivers, one was clearly a legal resident, so it's 50-50. We got deadbeats on both sides of that fence. And still, I do not know for sure if this woman was legal or illegal, I only know she was Hispanic, spoke little English and had no DL or insurance. - but she did stick around for the police and was issued 3 tickets. And then promptly tried to file on MY policy for her damage, lol.

Moving on, did any of you catch Kucinich at the debate last night? He was working his base. Blitzer asked "Do you support driver's licenses for illegal immigrants?"


KUCINICH: I take issue with your description of people being illegal immigrants. There aren't any illegal human beings (http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2007/11/transcript.htm). That's number one.

(APPLAUSE)

KUCINICH: Number two, they are undocumented. I believe that the best way to do it -- thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

I believe the best way to deal with this is cancel NAFTA and renegotiate the trade agreement with Mexico.

(APPLAUSE)

BLITZER: Let me re-phrase the question, Congressman.

If undocumented people in this country should be able to get driver's licenses...

KUCINICH: You give people a path to legalization, and then they can be legal and have their driver's license. That's the way to work it.

BLITZER: What about in the absence of comprehensive immigration reform?

KUCINICH: You know what? You give people a path to legalization and you work to make sure that you don't criminalize their status any further. Again, I take exception to the way you framed that question.

Didn't he mean, "You give people a path to documentation, and then they can be documented?"

The rest of the exchange:


EDWARDS: If we don't have comprehensive...

BLITZER: In the absence of comprehensive immigration reform -- doesn't look like it's going to happen any time soon -- do you support driver's licenses for illegal immigrants?

EDWARDS: No, but I don't accept the proposition that we're not going to have comprehensive immigration reform.

(APPLAUSE)

What I do support, and what I will do as president of the United States, is move this country toward comprehensive immigration reform. And anyone who's on the path to earning American citizenship should be able to have a driver's license.

(APPLAUSE)

BLITZER: Senator Dodd?

DODD: Well, it's important to put it in context. It's obviously -- look, clarity is important here. The American people, in a debate like this, want clarity here. Certainly, the whole idea of getting immigration reform is something I strongly support.

But I believe part of our job is to discourage those who want to come here -- I understand why they want to come, but coming illegally creates serious problems -- four to 500,000.

BLITZER: So, is that a yes or a no?

DODD: No, my belief is that giving a -- as I've said in the very beginning here, I think drivers' licenses are the wrong thing to be doing, in terms of attracting people to come here as undocumented.

BLITZER: All right. Thank you.

Senator Obama, yes or no?

OBAMA: Yes.

BLITZER: OK.

(APPLAUSE)

OBAMA: I'll tell you, I am going to be fighting for comprehensive immigration reform, and we shouldn't pose the question that, somehow, we can't achieve that.

I believe that the American people desperately want it; that's what I'm going to be fighting for as president.

(APPLAUSE)

BLITZER: Senator Clinton?

CLINTON: No.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~

BLITZER: Governor?

RICHARDSON: Well, my answer is yes, and I did it. You know why? Because the Congress, and I notice Barack mentioned the president, but the Congress also failed miserably to pass comprehensive immigration.

RICHARDSON: And we need to have it in this country. I did it four years ago. My legislature sent me a bill. I signed it. My law- enforcement people said it's a matter of public safety.

What we need is public safety, a reduction in traffic fatalities. We wanted more people to be insured. When we started with this program, 33 percent of all New Mexicans were uninsured. Today, it's 11 percent.

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: Traffic fatalities have gone down. It's a matter of public safety. States have to act when the federal government and the Congress doesn't act. The answer is comprehensive immigration. The answer is...

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON: The answer is -- secure the borders, a stronger relationship with Mexico. Those that knowingly hire illegal workers...

BLITZER: All right.

RICHARDSON:... should be punished. And a path to legalization. That is the solution.

BLITZER: Senator Biden?

BIDEN: No.

(LAUGHTER)

There you have it, the Dems final answer on the issue. Hillary finally decided no - for now. And what does Dodd mean by "I think drivers' licenses are the wrong thing to be doing, in terms of attracting people to come here as undocumented?" Are we supposed to be attracting people to come here as undocumented?

Are we supposed to be attracting people to come here as undocumented?Hello Steve:

What? You want ME to tell you what they mean?? I was watching Heroes, or the Dance thingy... or I was sleeping on the couch. Watching a politician politic bores the crap out of me.

excon

Hello Steve:

What? You want ME to tell you what they mean??? I was watchin Heros, or the Dance thingy... or I was sleepin on the couch. Watchin a politician politic bores the crap outta me.

excon

excon the politics mon,

Heck yeah, you are the all wise sage amongst us, 'splain it to me. :D