Who's in Charge? "Dream Act" Fails, Southwick Wins

By Jeralyn, Section Legislation
Posted on Wed Oct 24, 2007 at 02:31:06 PM EST
Tags: Dream Act, Leslie Southwick (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

With votes like these, it's difficult to believe the Democrats are the majority party in Congress. The Senate vote to advance the Dream Act failed today.

Supporters needed to get 60 votes to advance the DREAM Act, which would have allowed illegal immigrants who plan to attend college or join the military, and who came to the United States with their families before they turned 16, to move toward legality. The final vote was 52-44.

Despite efforts of Sen. Harry Reid and Dick Durbin, the Republican opposition framing the bill as one of amnesty prevailed.

More....

"Children should not be penalized for the actions of their parents," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. "What crime did these children commit?" added Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., the Senate's No. 2 Democrat. "They committed the crime of obeying their parents and following their parents to this country. Do you think there was a vote in the household about their future? I don't think so."

In another defeat for Democrats, the Senate today confirmed conservative Judge Leslie Southwick to a seat on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Liberal and civil rights groups opposed Southwick. They charged that as a state appeals judge for 13 years he consistently sided with businesses over workers and consumers.

Republican-Lite Sen. Diane Feinstein and Sen. Ben Nelson of the Gang of 14 crossed sides and voted with the Republicans.

People for the American Way castigates the Dems for their vote."

We are deeply disappointed in the Senate Democrats who acquiesced to the President today on Southwick’s nomination.

“That’s not what Americans voted for when they gave Democrats a majority in the Senate. Senate Democrats must hold the President to his 2006 pledge of bipartisanship and cooperation by rejecting nominees who fail to interpret the law fairly for all Americans.”

< ABA Publishes Death Penalty Issue | Brownie's Back to Give Expertise on Wildfires >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Who's in Charge? "Dream Act" Fails, Southwick Wins | 37 comments (37 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Lots to be afraid of (5.00 / 1) (#9)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 12:36:06 PM EST

Educating children is dangerous, just like providing health insurance to children is dangerous, only in the minds of the ideologically blinded. Seem to have a fair number of them on this site and way too many in both parties.

Educated undocumented children? What would happen to Fortress America then? Would there be compulsory chimichangas in the school cafeterias? Flan? Horchata?

Beyond the catastrophic cholesterol levels, just think of what they'll do to our culture. Our culture that without cripplingly expensive, hermetically sealed, militarized borders will simply be diluted (by which is meant "polluted" in line with the great American tradition of immigrant bashing which is what the Senate failure represents) by the nefarious styles of Latino culture. The telenovelas! The horror! The horror!

Instead of standing firmly for the principle of inclusion, the Senate under the Dems stood in the way of progress, as they have so so so often of late. Judge Southwick is just one such example of the Dems' unending capacity to move backward because it's easy, rather than demand better nominations and get results.

This is exactly the rhetoric that defeats (none / 0) (#10)
by Pancho on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 12:57:07 PM EST

bills like the Dream act. If this passed you would have immediately insisted that the provisions be extended to ALL children here illegally, and all that are yet to come.


Give it a rest (5.00 / 1) (#11)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:11:52 PM EST

The DREAM Act would have done no such thing. It would simply have failed to punish, which is what the mouth-breathing right can't tolerate. You gotta stop eating those wingnut-butter sandwiches.


Believe what you want, (none / 0) (#12)
by Pancho on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:26:01 PM EST

but history has spoken loudly and we refuse to be fooled again.


wrong (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:35:19 PM EST

it's not history speaking loudly but bigots like Tancredo who use the media like a megaphone to broadcast intolerance.

It's you on the wrong side of history here, and anyone who studied population movement under global capital for even a minute would realize that national borders are no barrier to people confronted with grim personal circumstances. Not understanding that makes fortress America types the biggest fools of all.


Why are people like you afraid to say (none / 0) (#14)
by Pancho on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 01:57:41 PM EST

"open borders"?

Where would you draw the line?


why are (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 02:51:41 PM EST

people like you afraid to say fascist?

It's just too obvious?

If you implement economic policies that force people off the land in Central America (through the IMF, NAFTA, WTO, World Bank), and if you allow finance capital to run amok (to the cheapest labor, laxest regulation of labor, environment, etc) then SURPRSE SURPRISE people who can leave those devastated economies attempt to do so.

Fix economic policies that immiserate vast swathes of population for a start. The problem is national/international, so what if maybe instead of whining about how THEY'RE hurting US, we demanded that the US Gov't, Central Am. gov'ts, immigrant groups, and US business and citizen groups sit down together and make something work?

But it's much more attractive to whine and race bait, if some of the posts I read here are any indication.


: Should we first (none / 0) (#16)
by Pancho on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 03:15:37 PM EST

study the causes of the California fires before we attempt to put them out?
You never answered my question.
Are you suggesting that open borders are the only viable solution other than fixing all the problems of the world?
What does race have to do with it?

tnthorpe (none / 0) (#17)
by jimakaPPJ on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 07:51:54 PM EST

Instead of standing firmly for the principle of inclusion,

I know that is a buzz world the proponents of open borders like, but it is has nothing to do with controlling our borders.


It's a buzz world (5.00 / 1) (#19)
by tnthorpe on Thu Oct 25, 2007 at 08:59:36 PM EST

after all, eh?

You have no ideas about immigration, just fear mongering and rabid claptrap imported from looney tune reactionary blogs. Your defense of civ posture is just sad. Give it up. Surely Gates of Vienna can offer you some better wingnut talking points.


: You have no solutions. (none / 0) (#21)
by jimakaPPJ on Fri Oct 26, 2007 at 07:42:02 AM EST

I have never seen you offer any solution to anything associated with illegal immigration and its fruit, illegal aliens.
Here are some things a reasonable person would consider.
Wouldn't it be a better solution for the individuals if their native countries solved the problems that drive their citizens to leave?
How can we help them?
Will enabling the individuals to leave provide any impetus for Mexico to have a more open and equitable society? Or Algeria? SA?
Doesn't illegal immigration release the stress that otherwise would force changes in the countries of origin??
Low pay and poor working conditions are changed by a reduction in the size of the labor force, with governmental help in enforcement. Labor is a product. Price is always sensitive to availability. Closing the border would be a huge step in dong that.
Your continual demands and claims of support remind me of a child playing in the sand pile while adults make concrete and lay bricks.

: Can you offer anything (