2007 June 17 Sunday
Rasmussen Poll: Populace Opposes Immigration Amnesty Bill
George W. Bush, the US Senate, and other Beltway elites are conspiring to ignore the will of the people.
Just 20% of American voters want Congress to try and pass the immigration reform bill that failed in the Senate last week. A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 51% would like their legislators to “take smaller steps towards reform” while 16% believe they should wait until next year. The survey was conducted on Monday and Tuesday night as the President was publicly attempting to rally support for the legislation.
Sixty-nine percent (69%) of voters would favor an approach that focuses exclusively on “exclusively on securing the border and reducing illegal immigration.” Support for the enforcement only approach comes from 84% of Republicans, 55% of Democrats, and 69% of those not affiliated with either major party.
Overall, just 21% are opposed to the enforcement-only approach.
Just 30% would favor legislation that focused “exclusively on legalizing the status of undocumented workers already living in the United States.” Fifty-seven percent (57%) oppose that strategy, including 63% of Republicans, 52% of Democrats, and 55% of unaffiliated voters.
The polls by assorted liberal media organizations that show more support for immigration and the Senate bill are designed to produce the answers they desired. Why? They want to convince opponents of the amnesty that the opponents are vastly outnumbered. They want to make the immigration restrictionists feel hopeless and helpless. Well, don't do it.
Contact your Senators and tell them to stop illegal immigration and slash legal immigration. Once you've done that: Think about how to change the US Senate. We've reached the point where we need to start defeating US Senators running for reelection. We need to impose a litmus test on all Congressional and Presidential candidates on the National Question. Advocates of cheap labor and Banana Republicans should be rejected.
Positions on amnesty/legalization are a good test;
it is hard to take a hardline stand on this,
without disqualifying oneself from good standing
in that which has a litmus test of pro-immigrationism
for all politicians above some level.
Politicians can take any position, even going against
affirmative action itself, so long as they are for mass immigration of undesirables.
Who imposes this test and why, is none too important in comparison to
to the observable pattern, that it exists, or has existed,
with some breaking of the ranks only recently.
Reassertion of sovereignty is feasible, since the nation as a citizenry to whom loyalty is owed,
when foreigners attack here, is an irreducible minimum.
"stupid is as stupid does",and nobody does stupid like the GOP.
Now we know why the Dems didn't impeach Bush,they clearly knew something we didn't.
El Presidente need only endorse gay marriage,gun control and publicly funded abortion on demand and he will have finally destroyed the coalition that brought 27 yrs of GOP rule(and during which remarkably little was actually achieved).
The GOP is using the rigged polls run by liberal pollsters to bolster its argument that its immigration plan is not that unpopular. I heard Tony Snow do this recently on the Laura Ingram Show when she raised the point that this administration is alienating its base. I'm sure he's not that misinformed, but apparently the phony polls are providing needed fig leaf protection.
Roy Beck of NumbersUSA had this remarkable comment about Bush:
>>When Pres. Bush came to their lunch Tuesday, people in the room said his body language and facial expressions showed genuine surprise at the number of Senators who told him that it isn't just the "immigration crazies" who are objecting to the bill. Rather, they said, regular middle class people are expressing their distrust and backing it up with real details from the bill.>>
Of course he doesn't actually care, but can he really be that oblivious? Throughout this presidency I have wrestled with the question "Is Bush crazy or stupid?" and still have not come to a satisfactory conclusion. I wish we had a "vote of no confidence" procedure in this country and could remove him in disgrace. Otherwise he's going to return to Crawford in 2009, still with that insipid grin on his face, telling himself, "Bushie, you did a heckuva job!"
Throughout this presidency I have wrestled with the question "Is Bush crazy or stupid?" and still have not come to a satisfactory conclusion.
He is a dry drunk. That makes him both crazy and stupid as well as dishonest and arrogant.
"Is Bush crazy or stupid?"
I don't think that he is either crazy or stupid. He is hugely ignorant of the way the world works and the way that the vast majority of US citizens live. He was born into money and connections. It was never at issue as to IF he would go to a good school and college and IF he would get an assist in his career choice. He's always know that he would. The same for his children. He is the moral equivalent of Paris Hilton. He can't possibly understand how normal, average American citizens react to his immigration nonsense because he has no idea how normal, average American citizens LIVE.
There has always been somebody around to pick up the pieces if he screwed up and to get him back on the right track. He, therefore, doesn't really understand that if he makes a mistake, there are consequences to bear. He's never had to bear them. He knows that no matter what happens with his idiotic immigration amnesty bill, he and his family will be all right. He doesn't know or care what happens to the rest of us.
He is a dangerous man.
The surprise observed, might easily reflect a condition of staying in a narrow group where all disagreement on the
immigration proposal is dismissed as crazy.
That is also the new left pattern which has been used for over 40 years now,
don't consider positions you don't like, just smear and 'diagnose' them,
and save yourself the stress of having to make an argument.
Bush would probably get rid of anyone on his staff who told him
that there were rational objections to the mass legalization proposed.
Now he has to go talking to Senators who are not afraid to look at
what the public response is, who don't just 'diagnose' it
if they are displeased, and who are not so sure that a smear offensive works every time if it has a chance to use
such terms as racism, bigotry, xenophobia.
To Bush its probably as unpleasant as if hecklers were allowed to congregate in the rose garden.
This means he won't do much of it.
Bush is neither stupid nor crazy. But he may be isolated. For years, we have criticized the MSM for being remote from the ordinary Americans they pretend to serve - the "Dan Rather Syndrome" - where journalists live in their own little isolated world of groupthink and Manhattan cocktail parties, where everyone shares pretty much the same liberal opinions, where average Americans who don't live on the coasts are regarded as some sort of alien beings, the "flyover people." Look at this story about New York Times film critic Pauline Kael (from Wikipedia):
Kael is frequently quoted as having said, in the wake of Richard Nixon's landslide victory in the 1972 presidential election, that she "couldn't believe Nixon had won," since no one she knew had voted for him. The quote is sometimes cited by conservatives (such as Bernard Goldberg, in his book Bias), as an example of allegedly clueless New York liberal insularity. There are variations as to the exact wording, the speaker (it has variously been attributed to other liberal women, including Katherine Graham, Susan Sontag, and Joan Didion),   and the timing (in addition to Nixon's victory, it has been claimed to have been uttered after Ronald Reagan's re-election in 1984.) 
There is in fact no record of Kael making such a remark. The story may have originated in a December 28, 1972 article on a lecture Kael gave at the Modern Language Association, in which the newspaper quoted her as saying, "I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don't know. They're outside my ken. But sometimes when I'm in a theater I can feel them."
Bush may be the Republican qquivalent of Pauline Kael.
Directly after the subterfuge was exposed, the American public came out in opposition to S1348 by a 48%-26% margin. A week later, after an open borders media blitz, the public's steadfast opposition to the amnesty remained, 48%-26%. After more time for exposure, debate, and contemplation, the public is now less convinced than ever. Almost a month after its introduction, S1348 is now down 51%-20%.
Your voice matters. Just because you're in the majority doesn't mean you have to be silent. Keep the pressure on. It's working.
Ned, actually Pauline Kael was the movie critic for The New Yorker, not the New York Times. Makes no difference to your observation. Even if the remark was apocryphal, it's one of those quotes or pseudo-quotes that will become part of our political folklore, because it's such a perfect illustration of how the minds of most of our academics and media types work.
What a piece of garbage this article is. Its not worth even discussing. Where is the link to the data showing exactly
how this "Rasmussen Poll" was conducted. Were the calls made at random? Or just in areas where a lot of anti-immigrant
people (aka rednecks) live? What were the poll questions? Didn't any of you people here go to high school? Does academic
rigor mean anything?
Only ignorant, uneducated people are going to see the immigration issue in such a simplistic way as "close the borders, round
em' up and throw em' all out!" Let's be a little more intelligent, shall we? Oh and by the way, let's stop blaming the
illegal immigrants for OUR PROBLEMS. Our country is so screwed up because we Americans are screwed up and need to WAKE UP!
Stop hating the immigrants!
Advertise here. Contact randall dot parker at ymail dot com