Mark,

You and I don't disagree very often, but we sure disagree on this. There is a fourth choice, but no plan is going to work if we don't first stop the tidal wave of illegals from entering the country. I'm not for mass deportations, but I don't have a problem deporting those who are a drag on our social and law enforcements systems (and we know who they are). In addition, I think you'd find a lot of the marginal ones would leave voluntarily if existing laws regarding the hiring of illegals were just enforced. The balance would, most likely, end up being those who have been here for a while, who have integrated, learned English (or at least their kids have), and are self-supporting. I have no idea how many of the present illegals could be weeded out over 2 or 3 years (hell, no one knows for sure how many there are), but one thing is for sure -- they don't all deserve to stay here and have a path to citizenship.

I was so touched by the Preidents personal memoir of a meeting with Master Gunnery Sergeant Guadalupe Denogean. Here is the story of a young boy who came to this country (illegaly) to pick grapes. Some how he endend up as a high ranking enlisted man in the United States Marines.

So if I can summarize, this felon became a Master Gunnery Sergeant, was seriously wounded, almost lost his life. But being an illegal he can now be deported back to Mexico? I'm confused.

It’s a shame to see that President Bush doesn’t have the word ‘attrition’ in his vocabulary as it is yet another perfectly viable alternative which he continues to ignore likely because it would aggravate the left like little else.

reality check - any political party which advocates hispanic deportation will be voted into the fringe...where they belong.

I must speak on this. It was stated "at best, disingenuous...more likely, they really do want to deport, but don't want it known that they are that heartless."

They already have shown being heartless to the American Taxpayer, the people that pay their saleries. Our government owes their allegience to the taxpayers and not to those that break our laws.

There is an old saying, "you are either part of the problem or part of the solution". I don't see our government being part of the solution IF they DO NOT deport the illegals. The law is the law.

If illegals are not deported and are given 'amnesty' what other laws can we see be broken and no consequences be enforced? Rape? Drug Smuggling? Kidnapping? Armed Robbery?

Lawyers will be able to create a field day in court with a defense that our own government allowed 12 million people break the law so why should my cliente be found guilty and pay restitution and do jail time?

Our government has removed GOD from about everything, parents can no longer parent and now they want us to believe doing something illegal is ok.

How much crack are these people smokng?

I tell you, Ash, you libs get confused so easily. Let me see if I can unconfuse you.

It is not a felony to be here illegally. That aspect of the House bill has been overwhelmingly rejected. So this Marine is not a felon. Second, Bush described the naturalization ceremony during which MGS Denogean became a citizen, so he does not have to be deported. Does that clear it up for you?

WOW, the conservatives are in full revolt. For some (not you Mark) we are seeing their true colors, and it is not pretty. The stuff I have read on NRO and Polipund is scary.

Bush has lost a good part of his base over this. His poll numbers could drop to 25% or lower.

Sorta spooky. Wasn't he allowed to join the Marines without being a citizen? So he could give his life but couldn't be a citizen?

Could say an Iraqi came here, legally, he could join the Marines?

Which of course leads to the perfect solution:

Let the Mexicans come here illegaly, but not felons.
Let them join the National Guard. Deploy them to the border to guard against new illegals (and their potential replacements).

Problem solved! Thanks Spookie.

Spook,

I agree wholeheartedly with you...and this program of the President's, if enacted, would swiftly reduce the number of illegals in country...but what I'm talking about is those conservative critics who seem to think we can build a two thousand mile wall in an instant and get rid of all illegals next week, and without any negative consequences.

I want a much stronger border fence...but these things take time; we're not going to have it built yesterday. I want a lot of the illegals to go home; but we can't start roundups...just one of the problems is how do we differentiate between a native born hispanic and an illegal immigrant? If someone has a sure-fire way to do this, I'd like to hear it...but I don't want my fellow Americans of hispanic descent rounded up just to satisfy an absurd idea of how to solve the immigration issue..

Kenneth,

In theory, yes - but in actuality we are talking about 12 million people we de-facto invited in by spending 20 years not enforcing our own laws...you can blame the government, but the government is you...did you spend the last 20 years vigorously advocating strict border controls? I'm not talking about SAYING you want controls, but actually out there in the trenches lobbying Congress, organizing political movements and getting your hands dirty in politics over it. If you didn't, then you are part of the problem, too.

Don't feel bad - I admit to being part of the problem, also: it is now time to fix it, but there are no quick fixes...at least there are none consistent with American ideals of justice and mercy. The President's plan is the only one that will work - throw him over because he doesn't satisfy your rage and all you'll get is Democrats who will do even worse - and do it intentionally because they de-facto want the 12 million signed up as citizens with Democratic voter guides handed out at goverment expense...

3. You can be in favor of deporting every single illegal alien in the country.

How about a realistic position here? Such as being in favor of deporting those illegals that are caught? And allowing attrition through enforcement to reduce the illegal population? Really, your mischaracterization of the non-amnesty postion is ludicrous.

No serious person believes 12 million people could be deported next month. No serious person expects a 2,000 mile wll next week. Serious people do believe that a journey of a thousand miles requires the initiative to take the first step. You must also be facing the right direction, or that first step will only lead you further from your goal.

Cool. We all agree.

Let's get back to more pressing matters.

Mark,

I guess the only thing we disagree on is the President's assertion that we need a guest worker program in order to control the border. I think he's got the cart before the horse. Once we've stemmed the tide, then we can talk about a guest worker program. There is going to be a lot of debate on this in the coming days and weeks. I'm listening to Rush right now describing the Hagel-Martinez Senate compromise bill as well as Senator Jeff Sessions' opposition to it. The bill will, by various estimates, allow around 200 million new immigrants over the next 20 years with a combination of relaxed legal immigration standards and amnesty for existing illegals (as I understand it -- someone correct me if I'm wrong).

You are right about the fact that it's not going to be easy to fix, and the longer we wait, the harder it will be. It's disheartening that one political party offers no solutions, and is, instead, hoping that disagreement among Republicans over this issue will sweep the Democrats back into power.

With the way this illegal immigration thing is going, the Republicans will be out of power and the Democrats will be in.

Guest worker is never going to work. We are talking about the Government overseeing that program, and they are the ones that allowed 11 - 12 million illegals in here in the first place. They can't keep track of those who are here past their visa, yet you expect that the guest workers will be able to be tracked? How?

The solutions to this problem are going to have to be numerous. First, go after those that hire the illegals. If there are fewer and fewer jobs, there will be fewer illegals. Many will leave on their own if they can't get work.

Get legislation passed that illegals do not get welfare. When they apply for aid the aid given will be a ticket home.

Stop aid to countries that have illegals here.

Put up a militarized border. We are at war. Yet our border open. Don't you think that with all these illegals there are thousands that are coming here simply to help bring the USA down?

Build a wall. I bet if contributions for building the wall were asked for, it would have no problem collecting enough to fund it.

We also need to pressure Mexico to do their part. The Minutemen are being sold out by our own Government. Funny thing here is the illegals find out within minutes of the Mexican Government finding out where the Minutemen are.

I am sorry, but the President doesn't have a clue on this issue. Remember he might have lived in Texas, but he was born in Conn. He is showing liberal tendencies with this issue, and it isn't pretty.

Josh Marshall, over at the lefty site, Talkingpointsmemo.com, had this to say, which I thought was a wonderfully subtle piece of satire (you have to give credit where credit's due: the Dems are great at that)...

"After more than a little trying I think I've finally gotten a handle on this immigration debate. Or at least the president's slice of it, which goes by the name of 'comprehensive immigration reform'. If I understand this right, 'comprehensive' reform is reform that's so comprehensive that it reforms the thing in question in every way possible at the same time.

"So, for instance, comprehensive sex reform -- which, given how things are going in Washington, could be just around the corner -- would mean expanding abstinence education and reducing the number of sexually active teenagers while also fulfilling the universal dream of teenagers everywhere to get laid.

"More prosaically, comprehensive military reform would involve replacing all soldiers with robots while increasing the Army's size by five divisions and reorganizing the force structure around sub-divisional units.

"Politics and policy make for strange bedfellows, especially when it's all politics and no policy."

Lol! Anyway, Marshall's point is Bush's comprehensive plan isn't exactly workable. And I suspect he's right. Personally, I think the whole notion of a "guest-worker program" is a red herring. Everything else being equal (more on that in a moment), there is just no way you're going to be able to kick out anywhere near a significant enough portion of the so-called "guest workers" once they're here.

That's where the "everything else being equal" part comes in. I don't know if it was Spook's idea or mine or someone else's (probably the latter), but I agree that the real lynch pin in making any kind of immigration policy work is to get aggressive on those that employ them.

Just yesterday Rove touted Bush as a supply-sider (albeit in a somewhat different context). That begs the question: without any emphasis on the supply side of the equation, how likely is it that you'll be able to affect the result to any appreciable degree? My guess is... not very much. I could be wrong, but my feeling is that when there's a will there's a way. Putting troops on the border may affect the "way" somewhat, but I suspect it will just change it -- not stop it. To do that you have to affect the "will": if no one is willing to employ them, well, what's the motivation to come in the first place?

Of course, getting aggressive on the job-suppliers isn't likely to be easy politically (much like cutting taxes -- which is politically easy -- without cutting spending -- which is politically hard). And that, I believe, is why it wasn't addressed in Bush's speech. In fact, he made the job-suppliers out to be more victims than instigators. What a load. Even short of a national ID program, it's still a load. As Anderson Cooper pointed out last night on CNN, you can go up online and easily check to see whether a person's SSN is likely to be bogus or not. Thus, even if a national ID program is instituted, if there is no incentive on the part of employers to pay attention to it, it will have no effect. It's just more smoke and mirrors.

Unless the supply side of the issue is addressed, in the end it will all be just more political posturing. But of course, moving in any significant way against the job supply side could very well be political suicide. Think about it... too much emphasis on the demand side will likely annoy legal immigrants and drive them into the Dem camp, while too much emphasis on the supply side is likely to annoy the money boys, and cause them to sit home in the fall. Politics and policy do indeed make for strange bedfellows.

Back when the immigration issue was first raised a month or so ago I mentioned that I thought it was a bad idea to bring it up in an election year. Heck, it's been pretty much avoided for the better part of four years already -- what's one more year going to hurt? Besides, almost ever since 9/11 the Dems have been harping on the Rep's disregard for border and port security as Bush's achilles heel on the whole national security issue. This was a softball lobbed into their court, much like the Dubai ports issue was.

NOW do you see why I wasn't in favor of bringing up the immigration issue in an election year? I mean, look at the comments we've seen on this site alone -- the Dems have pretty much found a common voice and the Reps are beating each other up. That's a victory?

By the way, Ol'Goat, I was born in Connecticut too -- just not with a silver spoon in my mouth. Come to think of it, I lived in Texas for several years, too. Dammit keefer, I'm sounding more like George Bush than you! lol!

Then again, I'm guessing the silver spoon part is kinda key. I wouldn't know a single bin Laden family member if I tripped over them.

Geez, Barney - you're right! They are having a complete meltdown over at Polipundit. Apparently he shut down all guest blogging because his guests won't tow the line on his "no amnesty" position. And now he has 500 comments from readers telling him they're done with him. Such drama!

Even here, there were dozens of posts from lurkers never before heard from. Exciting day in the conservative blogosphere for sure!

And as far as Bush is concerned - I've got to hand it to him on this one - he's got guts to make a speech like that! Good thing he's not running for anything.

Yet somehow, I suspect Rove has an angle on this backlash that will help conservatives.

Under the circustances, I agree with Mark that the Bush plan for immigration is the right one.

We could always build a "deathray" fence and then force all illegals to pay 3X Social Security and Medicare till they are eligible for US citizenship.
For those who don't want to pay, amnesty to the border.

Solve two problem at once, at least for the short term.

So many of these solutions ignore the Constitution - or at least, the way it's been interpreted by the Courts.

Illegals cannot be excluded from public benefits because the rights guaranteed by the Constitution apply to "persons" not "citizens" - i.e., they have them too.

Fences work for the Israelis. Granted, shorter border ....

What I haven't seen shot down is this:

#1: Create database at which employers can verify legal status in U.S. in reasonable period of time.

#2: Changes in tax code:

A: Only wages / compensation to employees / agents / independent contractors / etc. legally in the United States can be deducted as business expenses.

B: In filing quarterly reports, employer verifies that legal status of all persons identified as employees, etc. has been checked & verified (with penalties for filing false reports against party signing return - corporate officer, if corporation, etc.).

C: Likewise, signing tax return constitutes verification of legal status of employees, etc. whose wages were claimed as deductible business expenses (with penalties for false reports against party signing the return, etc.).

Key is a quick, uncomplicated way to verify employment status - if that can be put in place, then the most common argument against penalizing businesses ("good forgeries, who knew?, I can't spend all day trying to track this down, etc.") disappears.

Think, too, about the Securities & Exchange Commission ramifications of a publicly traded company filing false returns ....

Spook,

As I see it, no program can work without a guest worker component - it is the way to get them all above-board; to make the illegals, as it were, volunteer to end the illegal immigration problem. It is the carrot - the stick is detention and deportation on the supply side, and criminal prosecution on the demand side.

Its an integral plan, and each part of it is necessary for the whole to work.

There is a 4th option, one that has been mentioned in previous comments but is convniently ignnored by both the politicians and mainstream media. It simply consists of enforcing the laws that punish employers that hire illegals. You start putting CEOs for hiring illegal labor, and a few upper class professionals and wives for hiring illegal gardeners and housekeepers. Keep this up for awhile and you will soon see the work for illegals dry up, and they will return home to their own countries on their own. No need for mass roundups and deportations (a Trail of Tears for the 21st century), guest worker programs (a new indentured servitude), or a ridiculous wall extending for thousands of miles.

This is very similar to the failed war on drugs. As long as their is demand for underpaid illegal labor, it will be worth the risks to somebody to supply it. You kill demand by punishing the employers, and things will fall into place the way we want quite nicely. Unfortunately, the corporate powers who have pocketed and corrupted both our government and our journalistic media are the very people who benefit most from illegal labor and would be the target of real reform. Which is why you will never see this solution happen, or even hear it discussed seriously.

Actually, the Dept of HS and ICE is planning to spend huge amounts of money to do just that - round up all the illegal aliens and send them home. Here is what the President said:
"For many years, the government did not have enough space in our detention facilities to hold them while the legal process unfolded. So most were released back into our society and asked to return for a court date. When the date arrived, the vast majority did not show up. This practice, called "catch and release," is unacceptable, and we will end it.

We're taking several important steps to meet this goal. We've expanded the number of beds in our detention facilities, and we will continue to add more. We've expedited the legal process to cut the average deportation time."
Here is the plan. It's called "ENDGAME: Office of Detention and Removal Strategic Plan, 2003-2012." Look for concentration camps comming to a boarder area near you!

extra,

At least we have debates...perhaps you can convince DU and Daily Kos to start having them?

Mark - I don't read those left wing blogs. I only need to watch ABC News and read the New York Times to get my daily dose of liberalism, right? Besides, it's way more interesting to follow the party that actually has the power - wouldn't you agree?

Old goat: You said:
"Put up a militarized border. We are at war. Yet our border open. Don't you think that with all these illegals there are thousands that are coming here simply to help bring the USA down?"
No. What would be the point of bringing down a system that is enriching their home nation and families. Unpeg your paranoia meter please. There are reasons for security concerns but not from the migrant workers themselves.

"Build a wall. I bet if contributions for building the wall were asked for, it would have no problem collecting enough to fund it."
Go ahead. The walls we have already have worked pretty well so far. And the one the Israelis built stopped all terrorist attacks cold (Sarcasm X2). Even the Berlin Wall, perhaps the most militarized wall ever built, and not nearly 2000 miles long, was breached by motivated citizens.
I'm still wrestling with what response would be both fair and realistic but a really long wall ain't it.

AZsh, you amaze me. Your willingness---eagerness--to prove yourself a fool is simply stunning.

The United States has, for some time, had a policy by which a young person could volunteer for the military and thereby qualify for citizenship. In the Iraq invasion, such a young man was killed, and awareed posthumous citizenship in a moving ceremony, which thanked him for his service to his adopted country. This was quite widely publiczied---guess Ranty Rhodes didn't give it much time.

Who is responsible for the false conclusion that there are only two alternatives---mass deportation or mass approval of citizenship?

We can easily find a reasonable middle ground, one which is humane and recognizes the problems, both moral and logistical, of simply removing immigration scofflaws and yet respects the sacrifices made by those who respect this country enough to follow its laws on the path to citizenship.

We can offer illegal immigrants a choice---remain here, under a work permit/permanent residency program, but with no possibility of citizenship, or return home to start the process properly.

If we were to establish a firm time frame in which illegals had to register, and THEN make it a felony to be here without having registered, we would dodge the bullet of ex post facto lawmaking, and we would provide both a carrot and stick for registration.

Most of those who would refuse to register would do so knowing that their fingerprints are already on file for arrests in this country. So we would have a way to get rid of these people, albeit somewhat gradually, as they would over time be exposed and would be felons, thereby not allowed to return at any time, for any reason.

Others would be elimiated during the background checks, for similar reasons.

Those remaining would either be law-abiding---aside from their original illegal entry---or lucky enough to not have been caught at anything. They would qualify for work permits.

After a certain length of time, they would have to either go home or apply for, and qualify for, a permanent residency program---one modified from the existing program, to include some study of American history and law, and an English proficiency exam.

There would be, for a couple of generations, two classes of immigrants---those qualified for citizenship and thos permanently disqualified due to their lack of respect for this country when they entered it illegally. That seems fair to me.

But more importantly, it is fair to those who did it the right way, and respects their efforts.

First:
Vox Day's opinion is despicable

EVERYTHING Vox Day says is despicable. He's not a Republican anyway--he's a "Christian Libertarian," which combined with his worldview, is a very nice-sounding and completely illogical euphemism for "effing nutcase" (or Nazi, but YMMV).

Anyway. The catch and release deal: concentration camps, Chase? Gimme a break. They couldn't possibly arrest and book everyone caught (much less deport them). This is why we need a temporary guest worker program. There are still going to be illegals, but AT LEAST many will be accounted for.

Extramedium - nobody is proud of the carnage at Polipundit. Just because one guy let his blog (it's just a BLOG, remember) implode doesn't mean squat. It means one guy is a fool, and 500 people (or the majority of them) want nothing to do with someone like that. Seriously, you guys have your outcasts, too. Do I think that in itself is indicative of the entire Dummocrat party? No. The blogosphere is full of kooks. And as far as some Rove "angle on the backlash" goes--really, I wish that were the case, but you guys seem to think he's some kind of dark overlord. It's kinda funny, actually.

Ol' Goat:
Put up a militarized border. We are at war. Yet our border open. Don't you think that with all these illegals there are thousands that are coming here simply to help bring the USA down?

We are at war. With Islamic extremists, not Mexicans. They are absolutely not coming here to "bring the USA down." They really ARE here for a better way of life. La Raza, if that's where you're getting that idea, is an extreme leftist organization that IS anti-American, but Joe Schmo Mexican isn't. ANSWER (you know, the terrorists' friends) has stirred that anti-American business up too, to the detriment of Joe Schmo Mexican.

Remember he might have lived in Texas, but he was born in Conn.
Where you were BORN defines you? OMG! Not that it matters, but you DO know he grew up in Texas, don't you? I spent early years in NYC, but nobody would consider me a New Yorker. My stepdaughter was born in Panama. Does that make her Hispanic? (She's not.) Do yourself a favor: drop that argument like a bad habit.

BD:
That's another reason to have the temp worker program. Easy identification. But for now, realistically, employers aren't ICE experts. It's easy to get fake documents--I seriously doubt that most would be able to tell the difference without a trained HR staff, which pretty much rules out employers with small businesses. I know for a fact my father, who has employees, wouldn't know the difference between fake documents and real ones, and he's successful and very well-educated. He's not an ICE agent, though.

And how do you do the "database?" What's in it? (I'm asking seriously, not rhetorically.)

Almiranta,

I think you and I are only an inch or two away from being on the same page...but what I'm saying is that, at least to me, there seems to be a body of conservative opinion which won't be satisfied until we build a 50 foot high wall and immediately deport all illegals currently in country.

The practical difficulties in deportation - if we decided to go that route, mean that it wouldn't be a quick solution...and as we're rounding 'em up, they will keep coming across illegally until we figure out a way to either keep them out completey (nearly impossible, if we are to trade at all with Mexico)...a guest worker program, coupled with a tamper-proof idea and sanctions againt employers who hire illegals, is a vital part of any border security program.

in the Iraq invasion, such a young man was killed, and awareed posthumous citizenship in a moving ceremony

So almiranta, Mexicans are just dying to be American citizens, eh?

You left out option 4:

Jail time for all US CEO's whose companies hire illegal aliens.

That will solve the entire problem. Why would companies hire illegal aliens if they know they're going to jail? And if no one is going to hire them, why would illegal aliens come here?

Curiously Bush hasn't presented this solution at all. I wonder why that is?

Mark,

We can support your guest worker program if, as Almiranta says, it does not lead to citizenship. Deportation of 12 million illegals, may not be practical or possible. But granting citizenship or even creating a pathway to citizenship is amnesty, no matter what you or the President say.

Almiranta's idea is the most logical of any put forward so far. Thank you Almiranta for the clarity of thought. You should be running for office.

Jeff, I happen to have two very good eyes, I can also add. Apparently you can't add, nor can you see.

First off, many of the illegals coming here are not looking for anything but to reannex many of those border states. Though, I guess cause you are too busy ignoring what is going on, you can't see it. You didn't read the signs that the illegal immigrants had up. If you did any reading of the organizations that are here in the US you would find a large number of them are looking for reconquista. They want Texas, New Mexico, California, Utah back under Mexico.

Not only that, terrorists have been found trying to cross the border. If we have so many illegals here who had not been caught, just simple math would give you the chills thinking about the terrorists who are now in the US because of our border.

The wall is not the only solution. You need to man it. You need for it to be watched.

That will not keep every illegal out. So what? If it helps cut down on the numbers and gives the illegals a harder time to get through, so much the better. It gives patrol routes. It gives time for patrols to catch those trying to cross illegally.

You really are a pollyanna if you think that all the illegals who are here love the USA. I guess you just ignore all that is going on in the world in order to remain so ingnorant. I guess you thought those thousands of illegals who were protesting were really just out on a picnic.

No, for you it is just easier to throw up your hands and say it can't work, we can do nothing because it failed in other places.

Well, buddy boy, just because a system isn't 100% effective doesn't mean that it is useless. If the Berlin wall was so ineffective as you try to paint, then why did Reagan bother telling the Soviet Union to tear it down? I guess it was because the people who crossed so easily were getting their hands dirty.

Yeah. Right.