Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 4:01 am
You last visited January 22, 2017, 3:05 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

"Who Voted Against the Fence?


Directly quoted from Powerlineblog.com about the US Senate vote yesterday. 

http://powerlineblog.com/  for more discussion on the matter. 


"Who Voted Against the Fence?
This is the list--all Democrats:
Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Murray (D-WA)
Obama (D-IL)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
You have to give Bingaman credit for courage, I guess. The Senators next closest to the border who voted against the fence are from Washington and Illinois.
Posted by John at 11:22 PM | Permalink  "
Entry #315


TenajComment by Tenaj - May 18, 2006, 12:19 pm
Maybe the Democrats know that the fence is just a facade to cover up the corruption in Congress and the White House with this issue. The fence and the 6000 troops in my opinion is just a Bandaid. A way of saying "Look we are doing something drastic" when the real causes and clandestine reasons are covered up and the real problem is not even touched on.

It doesn't pull anything up by the roots. It's what I heard one Democrat say, when a water pipe burst in your house, you don't set up barriers to stop the flow. You shut off the water!!!! Not giving Mexican immigrants reasons to sneak into this county will stop the flow, not a fence. You can climb over, around, under a fence and through when someone is helping you. And a lot of that will still happen. I wouldn't doubt if employers are devising a system now that will work with the new I.D. cards. It it probably won't be legal.

I'll wager you nothing changes. It just won't be as easy. It will get worse. With the proposed bill it's just a revolving door.   Democrats don't run the White House or the Congress anyway. And haven't for many years. But they get blamed for a lot of stuff.

Democrats and Republicans are just an election.

konaneComment by konane - May 18, 2006, 1:00 pm
The government is boiling down to socialists versus capitalists .... Democrats having sold their soul completely to socialists. I'm old enough to have witnessed the transition.

Former Governor and Senator Zell Miller, Democrat said that the party left him, he did not leave the party. He campaigned for President Bush's re-election and is the voice on a campaign commercial for re-election of (R) Georgia Governor Sonny Perdue.   

Democrats have George Soros and Moveon.org orchestrating things in the background, all for the socialist cause.   

Labor unions which are heavily Democrat have forced businesses to move offshore.

Attorneys for the most part support the Democratic party because they're allowed to proceed with class action lawsuits which have broken the backs of many US corporations, making themselves very rich.

One of Dick Morris' articles said Clinton somewhere around 1996 signed a bill which allowed corporations to over value their assets which precipitated in the bankruptcy of Global Crossing and Enron which collapsed after he left office. Believe there are others but they don't immediately come to mind.

Since the first 4 paragraphs of this ( http://alamo-girl.com/0341.htm ) say that socialism was planned to be instituted in the US during a downturn of the economy and under Clinton it makes me wonder if it wasn't somehow orchestrated that way. Coupled with Clinton turning down bin Laden in 1996, leaving him to wreak havoc on US interests, precipitating 9-11 and ensuing costs it keeps making me go hmmmmmmmm ......

The Democratic party you and I grew up knowing no longer exists. Perhaps it was always driven by socialism and it's just now being revealed.

Socialism and communism are fraternal twins no matter which party they come from.

As far as Republicans, there are Republicans and there are RINOS (Republican in name only) which need a complete spine and guts transplant from someone who had them in the first place. I'm lucky to have a governor and two Washington senators who do have real spine.

As far as Democrats and Republicans I smelled the coffee in the early 90's then became vividly awake on 9-11.
KonformthismfsComment by Konformthismfs - May 18, 2006, 1:04 pm
A fence never stopped a criminal...The main problem is our own government has put out the message that although it is a crime to enter the USA illegally, we won't do anything about it. Infact we'll reward you for it! We'll even be on your side and encourage you to come on over!
The message is what needs to be changed. They keeps saying we can't deport 10-12 million people it's just not going to happen, when infact they mean, we won't deport 10-12 million people, so don't even mention it! We have deported mass amounts of them before in 30's and AMERICA DIDN'T FALL APART. And if we did it again today, we wouldn't fall apart! Might not have a Mall-wart or fast food joint on every corner, But who cares?
konaneComment by konane - May 18, 2006, 1:17 pm
I believe their concern about massive deportation is riots and all that entails. My concern too.

Hey if they came here breaking the law what's to stop them from going all out and erupting in the likes of which we've not seen in our lifetimes (God forbid), then there would literally be hell to pay.

Documentation in whatever form it entails has to be paralleled with closing the border.

If our legislators had any guts they'd repeal the Constitutional amendment which guarantees citizenship to anchor children, and for my money make it retroactive back to the last amnesty grant by Clinton. Deny all welfare benefits or whatever benefits are granted as any other nation would do to one of us were circumstances reversed.

Many things could be done, none of which are an instantaneous fix without dire consequences so we'll probably see this play out from the local level all the way to Washington over the next couple of years.
LOTTOMIKEComment by LOTTOMIKE - May 18, 2006, 1:46 pm
the thing that scares me is this.mexicans just surpassed blacks as the leading minority in this country.i think 13 percent of america is mexican now.another 12 percent slice is blacks.then you count you asian,indian,etc. by the time my kids are old enough to drink here in about twenty years they are saying that whites will be the minority.something about the minorities having more babies and a lot of mixed children coming along.i never dreamed i would be a minority........
TenajComment by Tenaj - May 18, 2006, 2:59 pm
Labor unions which are heavily Democrat have forced businesses to move offshore.

Attorneys for the most part support the Democratic party because they're allowed to proceed with class action lawsuits which have broken the backs of many US corporations, making themselves very rich.
I think these are excuses to defend and support a party. When I read about labor unions, they seem to me to be very very necessary. Without them people will be working 12 hours a day with not enough pay to feed their families, let along housing and the other necessities of life.

Remember the "Spirit of 34"? And these were white people! People lost their lives to get unionized. Remember the conditions people had to work under before labor unions. Who were getting rich? Without unions corporations will do the same and even worse.

As for as attorneys breaking the back of corporations. That is the lamest excuse I've ever heard. Gee. Example: Maybe if corporations didn't put un-tested drugs on the market knowingly that kill people there wouldn't be so many law suits. You know drugs aren't tested as long as they used to. It's a shame you can't trust drugs given to you from your doctor. Remember HMOs. Who were getting rich?

Corporations only want to make a dollar and if they make 2 billion in sells and have to pay out 50 million in lawsuits. Hello! Who's getting rich? The attorneys just get a piece of the action.

You may be right about the socialist. I don't know. I just know what is right. I know that the rich got richer and the poorer got poorer and the middle class is being slowly squeezed out. It's not right for the government to allow corporations to get away with what they do. It's not right to hire illegal immigrants to do jobs because they are so much cheaper than U.S. employees who demand better wages, and benefits. It's not right that our country allow millions of people to use our hospitals, housing, schools, welfare systems and the like while working our jobs while taxes and every thing keep going up. The average family can't even afford medical insurance.

It's not right that jobs are sent offshore because big corporations want cheap labor that not too far from slavery while middle to low income citizens struggle to make ends met.

It happened in almost every society in history. We just need to find a balance. People want to work and have a family and live a decent life. A corrupt government denied us that through the greed of big business.   

If it is something I don't understand please explain it because I do want to understand what Democrates have to do with the condition of our country. Especially since they haven't been in control. I'm not buying labor unions and greedy attorneys. I'm not trying to fuss with you, I just want to understand. Do some articles on Socialists so I can see where they fit in the picture because what I remember, any time the government didn't like resistance they called the groups/people communists.
konaneComment by konane - May 18, 2006, 4:30 pm
Before the advent of instantaneous communication, telephone, internet, etc., labor unions were necessary for a lesser educated lesser informed society. They have outlived their usefulness and will be the death knell of all US manufacturing. Look at Ford, GM and Chrysler barley afloat because about 40% of their costs are worker benefits tacked onto selling prices due to union mandated worker costs and they're not able to compete with foreign made autos. Who did it to the US worker? The unions did.

Lame lawsuits became popular in the 70's when fractional IQ people found an attorney to sue someone for an "injustice" that common sense could have prevented. The onset of our sue happy society was comparable then to blaming fast food for a fat kid the mother doesn't have the get-go to cook for and chooses the drive through.

With life there's risk but our sue happy society chooses to ignore plain common sense and chooses to blame everyone else for their problems ...... hence the shyster lawyers who happily advertise on tv to sue for anything. Many suits have been settled to simply eliminate time it would take to see it fully through to justice which has simply broken the door down for them to go whole hog.

The rich keep getting richer because they repeat the same behaviors that made them that way such as hard work, delayed gratification, correct investments and keeping their eye on the prize.

Conversely the poor keep remaining poor because they repeat the same behaviors that made themselves that way in the first place. That's why so many lottery jackpot winners end up broke in a few years .... they didn't smarten up and change their behavior from a poverty mentality so kept on repeating the same bad habits they had before they won. There have always been several income levels of people who have problems they need to solve but until their mindset can be changed they will continue on the same merry go round until one day they have a light bulb moment and decide to change. Change comes from within, a desire and determination to do so.

Corporations make money in a capitalist system .... that's the way it is.

If someone resents another person or entity making money that closes the door off for them also and they are not able to achieve the degree of wealth they want. It's simply how the world works and how thoughts create reality for each of us. Keep resenting rich people and the door that holds the big one will keep slamming in your face.

My take on corporations is they can make as much money as possible and it's great they have the opportunity and leadership to do just that. Their making money doesn't take anything from me unless I'm in direct competition with them then I'd better smarten up to compete. Their CEO's can roll in money they make and so long as they've broken no laws it's no skin off my nose because they're employing people who spend money and add to the economy, also ensuring their employees have a good retirement.

What corporations and their profits do is merely an illusion offered up by socialists who will kill capitalism through any lie they can foist on the gullible.

It's perfectly logical and correct to send jobs off to a society who is less skilled and very proud to have the opportunity to work. That's the way it is when Democrats have sided with "greens" most of which are funded by communist/socialists/kill capitalism factions and have steadily added more restrictions to building, to expanding all in the name of ecology when in fact it is for the express purpose to kill our economy. Add to that labor unions who have demanded higher and higher wages, more benefits, more everything and those costs are passed on to the consumer through higher prices. Hey, if I had a corporation I would go for the cheap labor so I could compete in the market place with cheaper prices which we Americans demand. It's only logical, go where you're welcome, go where you can thrive.

BTW, the only people making any money in class action suits is the attorneys. You might check some of the summaries of expenses to see what they charge.   Joe Bloe gets $10 the attorneys get millions.

For articles on socialism check my blog entries, as there are many references, many articles about what the left has done to KILL the economy in so many ways. You don't have to have a party in control to wreck things, you simply have to have a well orchestrated group to block progress while holding hands with labor unions, attorneys, greens which Democrats have done a sterling job of since the mid-70's ...... while their re-education machine known as the mainstream media delivers their propaganda via the boob tube every night.
TenajComment by Tenaj - May 18, 2006, 5:56 pm
my my my. Exactly what I thought. The symptoms of our corrupt government, society and capitalist system. LOL. Why did I even ask. God bless the child whose got it's own.
ToddComment by Todd - May 18, 2006, 5:58 pm
Anyone who says we don't need a fence is proving their ignorance of what the border is like down there.

Anyone who says that just getting the businesses to stop hiring illegals hasn't a clue, and has not spent the time to learn from history.

The real problem that has plagued Washington for so many decades is that they never honestly address the issue of ENFORCEMENT.

To all of you soft-in-the-middle people who have this strange aversion to building a fence (you know who you are), I have a few questions for you to ponder.

Just think about the questions, and maybe they will lead you in the right direction.

It's OK to change your mind. Don't be a robot. Think for yourself.

1. Do you leave your front door unlocked at night?

2. Do you think that the best way to stop a criminal from entering your home is to remove all the possessions, so that they have no reason to come in?

3. Do you think that the United States government has an obligation to protect its borders? (Regardless of whatever rules are imposed on businesses.)

4. Do you think that a hardened fence, backed up with 4-5 times the number of border patrol agents, will change the rate of illegal aliens entering our country, or will it stay the same?

5. Will building a fence affect you personally in a negative way? How? (Don't say that it will cost lots of tax money that could be used for other things, because the financial payback of fewer illegal aliens will more than pay for the fence.)

No need to answer. Just think.

Comment by pacattack05 - May 18, 2006, 6:27 pm
Todd, That had to be the most impressive command of the english language, that I've read or heard anyone write or say, in a very long time.

Right on the money....

Location Location Location........Protect our real Estate.....LOL

TenajComment by Tenaj - May 18, 2006, 6:44 pm
I'm not against building the fence to protecting our borders. They need to protect more than the Mexican border. And the reason Washington haven't honestly addressed ENFORCEMENT is because they never wanted to and still don't.   Corporations are making too much money paying for cheap labor. And they will continue to do so.
konaneComment by konane - May 18, 2006, 7:10 pm
The only problem I see with corporations making money with cheap labor is the burden placed on our welfare system and that burden indirectly subsidizing corporations. That part I don't like because schools and social services IMHO should be reserved for US citizens only.

The more money a corporation can make the better for our economy through jobs creation and increased spending as a spin-off from that.

Far be it from me to tell someone or an entity how much money it can or can not make.   However all those $$$$$ are inflated from when many of us grew up so have to do some mental adjustments when considering amounts.
TenajComment by Tenaj - May 18, 2006, 7:22 pm
The more money a corporation can make the better for our economy through jobs creation and increased spending as a spin-off from that.
Ideally, but that's not happening. The jobs are going out of the country to more cheap labor.

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.