ABC News: politics

[WifeOHunkyJohn 2]

I read this opinion and actualy thought it was very fair and balanced, considering a lot of the opinions slide very much into being very pro illegal-immigration and very anti illegal-immigration. Now if only the politicians whould think in such even tones, perhaps the immigration reform bill that comes out of the Senate would be more logical.

Then again, perhaps not.

Anyway, here is the link to the whole post - it's very long hence my reason to not post it all: OPINION by RICK TYLER

Press Secretary to Newt Gingrich, June 22, 2007

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has put off a vote on immigration reform until early next week, citing confusion within his own party on concluding work on the energy bill. That may be true, but what may also be true is that he likely does not have enough votes to overcome a filibuster by the bill's steadfast opponents. But waiting may not be in his interest as time is on the opposition's side.

Snow [White House press secretary Tony Snow], having for several years hosted a national talk radio and TV show himself, is about as good a communicator as you could hope for, certainly the best in this administration by a long shot. But not long into the interview, he sunk into a conspicuously condescending tone as Hannity, who on most days would be on the front lines fighting for the administration, tried to explain to his friend why this bill was simply not doable.

Snow then sunk deeper with accusations that Hannity was putting out misinformation. But when asked to "name one thing" that he had said that was untrue, Snow came up empty -- empty as the administration's political capital account.

As Newt [Former Speaker Newt Gingrich] often points out, more time has passed since the Sept. 11 attack than all the time it took the United States to defeat the Nazis, the fascists and the imperialists during World War II, yet today we are no closer to protecting our borders.

The administration has decided that it is easier to defend failure than to replace the government structures that don't work. The list of implementation failures because of this mindset over the last few years alone bears this out. Iraq, Katrina, out of control spending, Walter Reed, a man with TB allowed to enter the country unfettered, and 12-18 million people (more or less) inside the country illegally.

Before conservative talk radio in 1986, Americans were promised border control. To get it, they accepted amnesty for people here illegally. What they got was even more people here illegally and more on the way hoping for more amnesty which they got. What we did not get was a protected border. That is why we are where we are today, not because of talk radio.

So how do we solve immigration? Just how we got here, one bite at a time.

The first bite starts with controlling of and protecting our borders. The government's first responsibility is to protect its people.

We have the capability to protect the border, what we are lacking is the political will to do so. As a matter of national survival it must be done. We already know that if millions of people are crossing the border illegally that among them are gang members, violent criminals and drug dealers, but you can be certain that there are also, as ABC News reported earlier this week, those who intend to inflict massive destruction upon the American people.

So what we should do with the millions who are here now? Deport them? The answer is to do nothing. Let me explain.

Protecting the border has a very desirable secondary effect in addition to the national security aspect. It sends a clear message to the immigrant population who lack legal status that the American immigration system may no longer be a joke. That something has changed and the government is demonstrating that it may be serious about law and order and protecting the border.

Amnesty, on the other hand, sends a clear message that we think our own law is merely a set of suggestions that need not be followed. Demonstrating seriousness turns the conversations in the immigrant communities toward the necessity to gain legal status. A protected border for them means that if they leave they will not be able to come back nor will anyone be able to illegally come in.

After the border is protected -- and that may take some time -- the next step is to implement a verification system equivalent in accuracy, speed and security as a credit or debit card. This system would use biometrics to ensure the person being hired is who they say they are and the employer can know with confidence that all of their employees have verifiable legal status.

I should note that it is not possible for the government to implement such a sophisticated system and the reason the private sector could and does is because their competitors can and do.

The government has no competitors, and therefore has no incentive to get it done, which is the major problem underlying the current failing bureaucratic model. But with this system in place, there would be no excuse to hire someone without verifying legal status; therefore, punitive economic penalties should be imposed and enforced on employers who do so.

In exchange for legal status, temporary guest workers should sign a contract agreeing to obey the law, pay taxes, purchase required insurances, and if required, get a driver's license. Failing to uphold their agreement would result in being removed from the United States within two weeks without lengthy appeals.

We must protect America from would-be terrorists and criminals by first protecting our borders. Then we must make sure employers know who is eligible to hire and who is not. We can create a real solution to immigration if we demonstrate seriousness. And we can earn back the trust of the American people if we take it one bite at a time and measure and verify results along the way.

Rick Tyler is the press secretary for former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich. His talk radio show "Leading the Majority" can be heard each Friday at 2:00 p.m. ET on RighTalk.com

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

nice post