President's thought on Arizona border

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Does this tell you anything?

VIDEO Sen. Kyl: Obama Says No Border Security without Amnesty - HUMAN EVENTS

In a stunning revelation at an Arizona town hall meeting this past Friday, Republican Senator Jon Kyl told his constituents that President Obama privately insisted that he will not secure the border until amnesty for illegal aliens passes first. According to Kyl, Obama argued that Democrats would lose their bargaining chips for any type of amnesty if the government beefs up its presence on the chaotic border. “The problem is,†Obama allegedly told Kyl, "If we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.â€

Transcript (at 3:21):

SEN. JON KYL: I met with the president in the Oval Office, just the two of us… Here’s what the president said. “The problem is,†he said, "If we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.â€

[gasps from the audience]

KYL: In other words they’re holding it hostage. They don’t want to secure the border unless and until it is combined with comprehensive immigration reform. I explained, “You and I have an obligation to secure the border. That’s an obligation. It also has some potentially positive benefits. You don’t have to have comprehensive immigration to secure the border, but you have to have a secure border to get comprehensive immigration reform. You may be surprised, maybe you don’t think that there’d be any more incentive, but I’m not so sure that that’s true. In any event, it doesn’t matter we’re supposed to secure the border.â€

That’s why this is being done. They want to get something in return for doing their duty. And that’s—

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Chicago politics.

KYL: Yeah.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Just to be fair and balanced, here is a denial from Politico:

W.H. says Kyl story not true - POLITICO.com Print View

W.H. says Kyl story not true

By: Andy Barr

June 21, 2010 09:06 AM EDT

The White House on Monday denied Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl’s claim that President Barack Obama told him privately that he would not work to secure the border unless it was part of a comprehensive immigration reform package.

In a video that started circulating among conservative blogs over the weekend, the Arizona Republican is seen telling supporters in North Phoenix that in a private meeting in the Oval Office, Obama said “the problem” with border enforcement measures is that “if we secure the border then [Republicans] won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.”

Kyl said the president’s supposed statement is proof that Democrats “don’t want to secure the border unless or until it is combined with comprehensive immigration reform.”

But in a statement to POLITICO, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer denied Kyl’s account of the conversation, saying “the president didn’t say that and Senator Kyl knows it.”

“There are more resources dedicated toward border security today than ever before, but, as the President has made clear, truly securing the border will require a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system,” Pfeiffer said.

Kyl has been one of the most outspoken critics of the president on immigration reform and has before accused Democrats of holding up border security in order to keep it as a chip to negotiate for broader reform.

Later in the video, Kyl says the reason the federal government has not secured the border is that Democrats “don’t want to do it.”

“They want to get something in return for doing their duty,” the Arizona Republican said. “You don’t have to have comprehensive reform to secure the border, but you have to secure the border to get comprehensive reform.”

Since it is already known that by anyone watching the news, every democrat uses the phrase

"comprehensive Immigration Reform" in every statement regarding the border and how to solve

the problem, tell me who is telling the truth!

Edited June 21, 2010 by 6.8 AR

[MCSCOTT]

From the beginning article I had to question whether there was any truth to it or not, but when I read the denial from Pfeiffer it makes me think that there is alot of truth to the interview.

“There are more resources dedicated toward border security today than ever before, but, as the President has made clear, truly securing the border will require a comprehensive solution to our broken immigration system,” Pfeiffer said.

To me that quote is just another way of saying:

SEN. JON KYL: I met with the president in the Oval Office, just the two of us… Here’s what the president said. “The problem is,” he said, "If we secure the border, then you all won’t have any reason to support comprehensive immigration reform.”

Seems to me that to deny the safety of our country would be definate grounds for impeachment.

[Guest HvyMtl]

"Seems to me that to deny the safety of our country would be definate grounds for impeachment."

So, basically, every President since Ford should have been impeached. Perhaps every President since the border was left open after the Mexican-American War?

Bush had 9/11 to use as a reason to close the borders, and did not. Several other Presidents had reason to as well... and did not. Not Clinton, not Reagan, Not Carter.

I will put it in simple terms: Supporters of the Democrats want the eventual votes, as Hispanics generally vote Democrat. Republican supporters want the cheap labor. So no real progress will happen until: 1) There is a severe terrorist attack which occurs due to the open border or 2) Mexican Drug cartels attack and slaughter a large # of US Citizens on this side of the border...

[MCSCOTT]

"Seems to me that to deny the safety of our country would be definate grounds for impeachment."

So, basically, every President since Ford should have been impeached. Perhaps every President since the border was left open after the Mexican-American War?

Bush had 9/11 to use as a reason to close the borders, and did not. Several other Presidents had reason to as well... and did not. Not Clinton, not Reagan, Not Carter.

I will put it in simple terms: Supporters of the Democrats want the eventual votes, as Hispanics generally vote Democrat. Republican supporters want the cheap labor. So no real progress will happen until: 1) There is a severe terrorist attack which occurs due to the open border or 2) Mexican Drug cartels attack and slaughter a large # of US Citizens on this side of the border...

I'm not even saying that the borders should be closed completely, but the problem just keeps growing and growing and we've now come to a definate point where something needs to be done. Better border control, better ways or incintives to force officers to enforce our current laws, whatever it may be. It's sad that we can spend billions in tax dollars to go overseas and prevent one foreign country from invading another foreign country that has absolutely nothing to do with the US, but we can't stop the invasion currently taking place right here at home.

Once again I suppose I'm overestimating this country. Is the US going to get to a point where the people are safer if they are a part of a Mexican drug cartel, than they are by just being a legal US citizen?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Every president has let this country down, but it isn't about just the president.

Congress has a role to play in this fiasco, also, in the fact that they hold the

president hostage in upcoming legislation that the president may want. The

last one I saw use the bully pulpit to accomplish something against Congress

was Ronald Reagan, and it was for Star Wars defense. He even allowed amnesty.

It's a problem that has to have a very strong and popular president, even more

popular than Reagan, and his will be a hard act to follow.

[Guest redbarron06]

why is this not suprising

[Worriedman]

Republican supporters want the cheap labor.

To do what? Construction employment is down significantly, there are no manufacturing jobs coming open. Just what is it that Republicans want cheap labor for? With unemployment at the level that it is, and the number of good 'ol American Citizens out of work, just what do we need illegal immigrants to do?

I do not know a single Republican who is in favor of allowing more illegals in, and I know several. Maybe back when housing was going strong, or factories being built, but I think that old saw has gotten a little dull as of late.

[Guest jackdm3]

A lot of sweat-inducing lawns need cut.

[Guest Sgt. Joe]

To do what? Construction employment is down significantly, there are no manufacturing jobs coming open. Just what is it that Republicans want cheap labor for? With unemployment at the level that it is, and the number of good 'ol American Citizens out of work, just what do we need illegal immigrants to do?

I do not know a single Republican who is in favor of allowing more illegals in, and I know several. Maybe back when housing was going strong, or factories being built, but I think that old saw has gotten a little dull as of late.

Worriedman is correct. Having spent most of my adult life in construction (Painting and sheetrock) I started to see the difference back in the mid to late 80's. By the mid 90's it was rampant.

I found myself bidding jobs to the bottom dollar only to be told that someone had bid the same job for a number that would not even cover my materials. I was a stickler for using the best material available whether is was to hang, finish and paint a new high dollar lawyer or dentist's office or to simply paint your dog house. The companies that were underbidding me were not only skimping on materials but using illegal workers that they could pay half of what I paid my men.

Those practices have run many Sub-Contractors out of business in all construction fields.

I ended up having to find a niche to stay in business and that was specialty coatings that were going into new motels and such. The stuff that looks like wall paper at first glance but is actually a spray-on coating. I went the extra mile to be "certified" by several of those coatings companies and that is how we survived in the later years.

The same was true after Katrina, I had returned from Iraq and was not aware of how serious my injury was at the time so I was continuing to try to work. We bid stuff in and around NO only to be underbid by these companies using illegals by well over 50% on most jobs.

I am neither a "D" nor an "R", I am a registered Independent and consider myself a Constitutional Conservative when it comes to politics, I vote for the person and not the designator at the end of their name.

We simply must stop the flow of illegals into our country and THEN we can find a way to deal with those already here, the two missions do not have to be done together.

In this day and age I am sure one can find a Legal American to even cut their grass. I know several folks still in construction who have been forced to sideline into the Yard Work field just to make ends meet, and again that is just as much because of the competition from the companies that use illegal workers as it is because of the struggles of the economy itself.

[BigK]

The secret word for today is "DE-MAGNIFY". I think I heard Phil Valentine use it first, but it's been in practice for decades. Any time you want to keep vermin out, but cannot. You must remove their incentive to come in.

No jobs, No housing, No vehicle, No utilities, No welfare, etc. without "REAL" proof of citizenship. If they can't make money, drive, get water and electricity, and have no place to live there will be no reason to come here and better yet no reason to stay.

This can be accomplished with local ordinances and state laws. It's already been passed in 20 states. Guess who has stopped the laws...the ACLU. They are half the problem, the U.S. Congress is the other half.

Edited June 22, 2010 by BigK
spelling

[Ebow1]

Find

Every

Mexican

Available

[Ebow1]

Common sign and tshirt after Katrina hit.