Getting Unserious About Border Security
Just when you thought that the Senate had ‘gotten religion’ and was serious about tightening border security, you read an article like this and you realize that they aren’t serious.
Less than two months after voting overwhelmingly to build 370 miles of new fencing along the border with Mexico, the Senate yesterday voted against providing funds to build it. “We do a lot of talking. We do a lot of legislating,” said Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican whose amendment to fund the fence was killed on a 71-29 vote. “The things we do often sound very good, but we never quite get there.”
It’s getting to the point where you simply don’t have faith in these clowns doing the right thing in terms of securing the border. Sen. Sessions is one of the serious people in the Senate that actually wants to get things done right.
Virtually all Democrats were joined by the chamber’s lone independent and 28 Republicans in opposing Mr. Session’s amendment to the Homeland Security Appropriations Act. Only two Democrats, Sens. Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Thomas R. Carper of Delaware, supported funding the fence. All told, 34 senators, including most of the Republican leadership, voted in May to build the fence but yesterday opposed funding it.
Only two Democrats voted to fund the border fencing. Anyone who thinks that staying home this November will send people a message is kidding themselves. You think we’d get serious border enforcement with Democrats running the Senate? Get serious. Do you think they wouldn’t pass a toothless, no prevention bill sometime in the next two years? If you think they wouldn’t get something wimpy passed, then you’re delusional.
By the way, it’s time to start thinking of primary challenger so we can get rid of idiots like Chuck Hagel, Arlen Specter and George Voinovich. It’s time they got ‘retired’. Additionally, find GOP candidates capable of defeating Jay Rockefeller and some of these ultralibs in 2008.
It’s time we ‘hired’ a new batch of senators that aren’t a bunch of wimps. It’s time we found a new batch of Tom Coburns.
Technorati Tags: Illegal Immigration, Jeff Sessions, Tom Coburn, Chuck Hagel, George Voinovich
Cross-post at LetFreedomRingBlog
July 14th, 2006 at 12:48 am
[...] Cross-posted at California Conservative Categories: GOP, Midterm Elections, Presidential Elections, Homeland Security, Immigration, Democrats | [...]
July 14th, 2006 at 5:36 am
[...] Thanks to California Conservative who put it so nicely. Just when you thought that the Senate had ‘gotten religion’ and was serious about tightening border security, you read an article like this and you realize that they aren’t serious. [...]
July 14th, 2006 at 7:08 am
[...] Hat tip to California Conservative [...]
July 14th, 2006 at 8:32 am
Senate denies funds for new border fence
Via Washington Times
Less than two months after voting overwhelmingly to build 370 miles of new fencing along the border with Mexico, the Senate yesterday voted against providing funds to build it.
“We do a lot of talking. We do a lot of …
July 14th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
Sadly, in California, you’ll never defeat an incumbant in a primary. The only way is to lose the seat for a cycle. Then elect a new man.
Joe Lieberman, on the other side of the aisle, has the support of a majority of the people of Connecticut but has the support of a minority of the people of his party.
Closed party primaries determining access to The People’s general election ballot is denying the people the choice of the candidates they like.
Herb Caen wrote wonderfully about San Francisco getting Dianne Fienstein as Mayor. He described SF as a political “doughnut” having all the extremes and no constituency for centrists, but a city best governed by a centrist. He said the right person, who could never have been directly elected a first time, inherited the office (sadly, due to an assassination). And the people were wise enough to reelect her.
I don’t like Dianne Feinstein or her politics, but I feel that way about the San Francisco populace too. She is well left of center, but she was dead center for SF’s politics. It’s good for us all if even communities of our political opponents are honestly, fairly, REPRESENTATIVELY governed. That’s Federalism.
Arnold Schwartzenegger is not the most conservative candidate, and would not have won a party primary BUT he serves this diverse state well. Richard Riordan also is called a RINO, fairly so, but might have been found appropriate for California (Remember, the biggest spender in the primary he lost to Bill Simon was Gray Davis)
The real solution is structural reform. Open primaries and instant run-off tabulating.
The current system of closed party primaries for access to the general election ballot is giving us legislatures populated by a representative balance of political extremists. Houses that spend large portions of their workdays on internal, combative politics. Not seeking common ground, not valuing it. feeling no obligation that being in office obliges you to represent all, including the citizens who supported your opponent.
July 14th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
Whaddya meaning “getting” unserious? I have yet to see a serious approach to the issue from this Administration, alas. It may well be Dubyah’s Tragic Flaw.
July 14th, 2006 at 10:58 pm
Why would they fund a border fence if it would stop them from funding their Big Dig line their pockets pork barrel projects? Is anyone really surprised at what politicians do.
This country needs a revolution.
July 15th, 2006 at 9:13 am
Ed—
Open primaries are a TERRBILE idea. Why would I want some liberal Bay Area geek voting for the Republican HE wants in, even though he is a registered Indie, or Decline to State?
It is the right of a Party membership to vote on the candidate THEY want to field, and no one else’s.