Albatross--Virginia's not the most conservative state in the union now because it's really two states with very different interests: Northern Virginia, with the educated and wealthier elites, and the rest of the state. Most of the growth has been in the DC metro area including NoVA, including, yes, a lot of immigrants. But, as has been the case with illegal immigration in general, it's the elites and the immigrants themselves who favor it, not the working stiff. Even then, despite Allen's missteps and the general disgust with Republicans, he and Webb are still neck and neck. Hardly a mandate for anything.

Also, Albatross, there is nothing requiring or even permitting the very illegal stops you're talking about. Nor would additional law be needed for law enforcement to ask about immigration status. In fact, federal law already requires aliens to carry proof of their status. Likewise, some random checks such as the checks for drunk driving are permitted. If one is stopped in these checks or for, say, speeding, or any other infraction, it's perfectly legit to ask for immigration status. The issue is profiling and the simple way to get around it is to ask everyone for proof of status. One is already legally required to provide ID to law enforcement when stopped for infractions. Federal law also provides for local police to be trained in immigration law. WHAT IS CLEARLY ILLEGAL is for localities to have "sanctuary policies" in violation of federal law.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: AliBA,

Ah, that's not quite accurate. Nobody is required to "show ID" when questioned police, you are however required to "identify yourself" to the officer, but if you drive you'll obviously have to show proof that you're entitled to that privilege by producing a license. This issue however is too complex and complicated to be lightly discussed; I won't even comment on the Puente case and how it relates to the 4th amendment.
And to talk about licenses to aliens is a waste of time, the talk is purely political and inconsequential because Real ID, effective in 2008, already requires proof of legal status in order to obtain a license.

Here's Jim Webb's position on immigration, from his campaign website. Not quite the liberal Albatross might think he is. Lots of us "moderate" Democrats out there. His wife is Vietnamese, so presumably he won't get called "racist". Somewhere I've seen that he also opposes "guest worker" programs, including expansion of H1-B.

"The immigration debate is divided into three separate issues. How can we secure our border? What should we do about the 11 million undocumented workers? And, lastly there is the guest worker question. It is necessary to separate out the 3 issues. The primary concern must be securing the border. Immediate action is needed to stem the flow of illegal border crossings. Approaching the issue using an omnibus bill that attempts to solve all three issues simultaneously creates a political stalemate that delays the border security solution. There is a consensus that our border security must be improved and we should act on that consensus as soon as possible. Once the border is secure we can develop a fair solution to other immigration issues."

Key word "fair solution on those illegal immigration already here" <----what do you think that means?? thats rights, it means "path to citizenship" or in another word "amnesty"..meaning "enforcement-only" is definatly off the table.

Mattefect, did you see bush press conference??? a reporter bought up immigration in the conversation and asked him that most democrats agree with him on immigration then republicans, and he said that he will work with democrats and he even thanked the reporter for asking about immigration because he had forgotten that he indeed agree with them on comprehensive immigration.

LOOK, ADMIT IT, AN AMNESTY BILL WILL COME THROUGHT,EVERY EXPERT WILL TELL YOU THAT THE LAST LINE OF DEFENSE ON IMMIGRATION WAS THE GOP LED HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE AND THE INSTANT THEY LOST CONTROLL OF THE HOUSE, AMNESTY WOULD BE NEAR.

I EXPECT A FEW CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS TO SPEAK AGAINST IT, BUT YOU SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT THE LIBERAL CAUCUS CONTROLL THE AGENDA, MEANING THE HISPANIC CAUCUS WILL NOT ALLOW A FEW CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS TO HALT COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION, ITS JUST NOT GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGHT CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS TO BLOCK IT...WE HAVE MORE THEN 50 HISAPNIC INSIDE THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, THEN WE HAVE THE SAME NUMBER IN THE BLACK CAUCUS WHO AGREES WITH COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION.

LOOK, I THINK PELOSI SHOULD ALLOW THE CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS TO VOTE AGAINST IT AND TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH, WE WONT NEED THEIR VOTES BECAUSE THERE'S ABOUT 10 CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS IN THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND I EXPECT SOME OF THEM WILL VOTE FOR THE GUEST WORKER BECAUSE THEY BELIVE IT'LL BE GOOD FOR SMALL BUSINESS.

AND ALSO, WE WILL GET CROSS OVER REPUBLICANS LIKE FLAKE, AND THE 3 CUBANS AMERICANS IN SOUTH FLORIDA THAT DID LOBBIED FOR THE IMMIGRATION BILL IN OPPOSITION TO TANCREDO AND THE HOUSE CRAZIES.

Aren't you the same guy who thought we'd have amnesty before summer?

There's always a chance that someone will cut some deals somewhere and amnesty will get through, but I wouldn't bet on it.

ALL DEMOCRATS ARE CONSERVATIVE WHEN IT COMES TO KEEPING THEIR JOBS, ALBATROSS. Again, they have less than 2 years to prove that they're not Bush and to distance themselves from him. For that matter, isn't it the McCain-Kennedy amnesty the Senate passed? Now, why would they want to help out the front-running REPUBLICAN presidential candidate by handing him Hispanic votes?

All the problems with S. 2611--the failure of the 1986 amnesty, the lack of a workable and enforced employer verification system, the large numbers of illegals who would be legalized AND ESPECIALLY THE TREMENDOUS EXPENSES INVOLVED according to the CBO still exist. Furthermore, Democrats are traditionally FOR the worker--and who wants to throw away the votes in Michigan or Ohio (which went Democratic this time, and gave Bush the last election). The Nancy Pelosis of this world and this Congress are of the same cut as many of the Republicans who were just kicked out of office--wealthy, and out of touch with most of the voters. They're in now because they're NOT REPUBLICANS. That can easily change.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: AliBA,

So you're saying the same democrats that screamed at the house republican for blocking amnesty, to turn around and act like immigration extremist??? you are plain stupid...the reason why its impossible is because there's about 74 members of hispanic caucus and you cant spit in the faces of such a large caucus inside your own party....you are dumb i must say..

Here's why amnesty will pass with a democratic held congress....The hispanic bloc is a very loyal voting block that votes democratic every year, and the democrats wants to give them amnesty to their undocumneted families, shortened their path to citizenship and get them to vote democratic once they are eligible to become US citizens..Why do you think the liberal wing is the strongest supporter of amnesty?? BINGO, BECAUSE THOSE HISPANICS ARE MORE LIKELY TO VOTE DEMOCRATIC.

The hispanic lobby works hand and hands with the democrats and you are a fool for suggesting pelosi will act like hastrt and tancredo....

The republican will never get the majority of the hispanic vote because of their anti immigration rhetoric, so i wouldnt worry about mccain or others....The hispanic voting block want amnesty, so they will get amnesty.

EVEN LOU DOBBS ADMITTED THAT WITH THE DEMOCRATS IN CONTROLL, AMNESTY WILL BE NEAR...NOW IF LOU ADMITS I, I DONT KNOW WHY YOU ARE SO DUMB.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: albatross23,

Speaking of, a certain persona has not been seen since the Donkey won both Senate & House. After making bold statement that Elephant will hold their ground. Maybe lost too much money gambling on it?

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE DUMBO THAT PREDICTED MASS DEPORTATION BEFORE AMNESTY??!!..I GUESSS HE KNOWS THAT AMNESTY IS WELL AND ALIVE. HAHAHAHAHA.

I EXPECT TED KENNEDY TO PUSH THE AMNESTY AS FAST AS POSSIBLE AND THE AMNESTY WILL BE PUSHED UNDER OUR OWN TIMETABLE SINCE WE HAVE BOTH HOUSE.

I EXPECT SPEAKER PELOSI TO PASS A FEW BILLS FIRST, JUST TO GET ON THE GOODWILL SIDE OF THE PEOPLE, SO EXPECT THE MINIMUM WAGE AND HEALTH CARE BILL TO BE THE FIRST 2 BILLS BEING PUSHED, THEN YOU WILL SEE THE AMNESTY COME UP.

I DONT THINK THEY WILL WASTE ANYTIME WITH IT BECAUSE THE LONGER THEY WAIT, THE BETTER IT'LL BE FOR THE REPUBLICANS BECAUSE YOU WANT TO PASS IT AS FAR AWAY FROM THE NEXT ELECTION SO THAT IT WONT BE IN THE MIND OF THE VOTERS IN 2 YEARS.

Alibaba is right Virginia is actually two states northern virginia where the immigrants / wealthy / educated ppl live and the rest of virginia conservative / middle class ppl...
also its noteworthy that the same northern virginia voted for allen last time ... enough votes to get him through. This time no sir he had to go out and call one of 'em a macaca .. rofl .. that was it for him
no mo senate for you ex-governor and senator sir.

Alibaba is wrong when he/she wrote that Webb is not on board with other democrats on amnesty / guest worker. During his campaign he repeatedly said that he is for earned citizenship and guest worker program.

Albatross your caps are really annoying ...
type without caps please.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: moemoe,

Both the House and the Senate will be under Democratic control. It will be hard to match the work of Sen. Specter in the Judiciary but if Sen. Leahy becomes the new chairman of the committee, he has a real good chance of excelling at the position. It was moving to see this man argue against torture and for the enforcement of the Geneva Conventions; it was a very delicate point, one directly touching national security interests and this individual did not hesitate for a second to remain true to his moral principles and make sure everybody knew the real consequences of potentially dangerous legislation.
I don't know I agree now with the idea that immigration reform all that unpopular. Some candidates that were openly identified as amnesty supporters were elected or re-elected without any difficulty. Perhaps the war in was made the priority by their campaign managers, but there's other cases that make it clear that people are simply not buying the idea that illegal aliens are the root of all evil. Take Rep. Hostetler for instance, he centered his campaign around illegal immigration, he stated that voting for "the other guy" would be giving amnesty to millions of illegals, but people simply did not care.
It will be interesting to actually see what's going to happen, but I wouldn't even dare to say that change will not be possible. It took only a few hours to have some significant change in DC. For quite a while now some groups and many politicians have been calling for the resignation of Mr. Rumsfeld. The new balance of power in Congress apparently managed to somehow achieve this long-awaited change in less than 24 hours.

How will the senate be under Democrat control if there are now 2 independent Senators? I can't imagine Liberman being too cozy with Democrats after they abandonded him after the primary.

Just going on party lines though, each party has 48 Senators. How will it be determined who runs the committees?

Lieberman has made a deal with the democrats that would permits him to keep his seniority in exchange for staying a democrats, therefore, there's no problem with him...Also, liberal is extremily liberal and a strong amnesty supporter, so i just dont see him refusing to caucus with the dems because of amensty.....Liebberman was actually one of a few senators that i saw talk about the amnesty bill during the debates whyle others just tried to get around it.

Where ImmortalE?? this clown must feel will stupid right now.

I just cant believe some anti-immigration people on this board still holding out hope that amnesty wont be pass...Go to washingtontimes.com, they have a nice article explainning why amnesty chances have grown by 300% now that the dems are in controll.

Mr. Lieberman stated clearly that he will always consider himself a democrat, that's old news actually. The real news is that change is on its way, and that cannot be denied. President Bush has kept a very tough position when it comes to the efforts in Iraq, he's now willing to negotiate and listen to what others have to say. The resignation of Secretary Rumsfeld is also a very strong sign of change. This election was not small potatoes for the GOP, they've lost the House, the Senate and the majority of the Governorships, the GOP became minority overnight in every sense of the word. it's very clear that people want change. Mr. Santorum lost badly just like Rep. Hostetler and they made immigration a very bold campaign issue time and time again. What's interesting about this is that they lost in states where conservatives usually enjoy plenty of popular support.
The nominee for chairman of the House Judiciary already ambitions "broad" immigration reform, but to talk about the real extent of such reform would amount to speculation at this point.
Amnesty is not the answer and enforcement only would not solve a single problem. The flaw in INA is that the law lost touch with reality. It's as simple as that, the law needs to be checked against its real implications.
For instance, expecting brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens to wait in excess of 10 years for a chance to "apply" for a visa is completely unrealistic, asking an employer in need of specialized labor to wait for months or even years for a chance to "start the process" is also unrealistic. Waiving some grounds related to terrorism while forever excluding an alien for a false citizenship claim to get a job is completely unfair. While all these acts should be punished under the law, the balance and fairness is long gone. Obtaining a job to support a family cannot be a more severe offense than advocating terrorism. An alien can be convicted of illegally selling firearms under 922 and become admissible because the crime is not a CIMT, another alien who was convicted of simple possession 20 years ago in his own country is forever banned because, believe it or not, we didn't commit the offense in the U.S. and therefore is not eligible under FFOA. Lots and lots of people who represent no danger are excluded on technical reasons, the lines are too long and there's simply no simple mechanism to satisfy two of the most important demands, the need for labor and family unification.
Nobody knows what will happen, but it will be fun to watch.

sugarbuff
both independents have said that they will caucus with democrats ...
that's why media is reporting that democrats have 51 seats now in the senate.. thus owning the senate.

quote:

Originally posted by moemoe:
sugarbuff
both independents have said that they will caucus with democrats ...
that's why media is reporting that democrats have 51 seats now in the senate.. thus owning the senate.

Sen Lieberman, specifically, has said he will remain in the Democratic Caucus on the sole condition he retains his seniority. This means he will now head as Chair of the Senate Governmental Reform Committee (?). I do not think the Democrats will be that stupid in not acknowledging his senority; however, I do think they will limit his access to intelligence info since he has steadfastly stood by President Bush on Iraq.

Now that the election is over and the Democs got the House and Senate, where are the noisy Bush supporters here? I only see a few ones barking...and they bark in a very low voice; unlike previously when they arrogantly displayed their stupid preference for this Bush.
It's not Americans against the Republicans. It's against Bush. If I were Bush, I would resign. What a shame !

Please, what are the difference between your action now and the so-called Dubya supporters? After 2004 election, elephants behaved like 5yrs old throwing taunt and jeers. Now, its the donkey's turn to do the same thing. Grow up people!

Let's hope the new congress & senate can do better job than the last one. In the end, that's the only thing that matters.

The Republicans led by Bush-i-t performed so bad that all the Democrats have to do is to exert only 10% effort and still out performs the Republicans.

quote:

Originally posted by iperson:
Aliba still thinks Reps are in charge and he can't put it through his thick skull someone may have a totally different world viewpoint.
Democrats are a different breed. They are elected to do what's right for America, not what suits their business best.
And that's the difference between the two parties.

There is no difference between the Republican, Democrat, or any other party when it comes to having control of a legislative body. I will give you an example, IP. Labor unions are staunchly democratic supporters, but they are alos staunch anti-foreign labor in the manufacturing and other highly skilled jobs.

In other words, whether Democrats or Republicans, both have vested interest groups to protect. The Republicans protect the businessmen and oil companies while the Democs are for Labor and Unions. But if you ask me, I prefer to be on the side of the workers and the poor rather than with the rich and powerful of which the Bush Family belongs.