December 17, 2010

The SCHEME Act up for a vote Saturday

The lame duck Senate is scheduled to vote on the DREAM Act, which is, in effect, a sneaky mid-sized amnesty, on Saturday.

48 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dreamnesty.

OneSTDV said...

Wait, the left is advancing a surreptitious initiative to alter this country's demography?!?!?

Jim Bowery said...

As John Derbyshire once wrote in the National Review:If Americans minded what was happening, they didn’t mind enough to stop it.

The logic is obvious: If "Americans" can't be bothered to (uh, do what exactly?) they are effectively consenting to turn over their territory to whoever buys off some guys that call themselves "representatives".

Anonymous said...

The American Dream is supposed to be for OURSELVES and OUR posterity.

Anonymous said...

Who are the undecided Senators on this? What can we do to stop it?

hoo said...

I get this idea from the immigration restrictionist crowd that it is either all or nothing.

That is, either we kick out every illegal or else they will accept nothing.

The problem with that approach is you often get left with nothing.

Anonymous said...

Call and fax your senators.

Anonymous said...

its a damn shame vdare isnt open right now.

Anonymous said...

As someone who lived in Central California for ten years, VDH's Nat Review column on the place's decline brought real tears to my eyes, not just for the fate of that state, but for the future of us all.

Anonymous said...

Immigration is a driver of big government. The more our population resembles the population of Latin America, the more our government policies will too. California is our future.

Anonymous said...

So it looks like the political class (Democrat wing), will get its way in the end, as they always do, and succeed this time when the political class (Republican wing) failed a few years ago when George W. Bush's best efforts were thwarted by a well planned peasants' revolt by literally hundreds of thousands of concerned White Americans who tirelessly worked the phones and left messages along the lines of - "If you approve this I will never vote for you again" - this prompted sufficient political willies to scare off enough politicos.

MORAL:
Despite 'playing' at democracy, the political class always get what it wants in the end.

Anonymous said...

My senator is Russ Feingold. No point calling his office on this one.

Anonymous said...

You can watch the vote right now at www.numbersusa.tv.

You should have been faxinig, phoning and emailing all day yesterday. I know I was.

Anonymous said...

1. Latinos were here fisrts. It is their land.

2. They have more kids.

3. White people have enslaved other human beings.

4. We ("whites") deserve everyhting we get.

Polichinello said...

Hoo,

I'm going to assume you're new to this debate, because you can only make this sort of assertion honestly if you're a beginner:

"I get this idea from the immigration restrictionist crowd that it is either all or nothing."

Go to the first "DREAMageddon" link put up by Kaus:
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/kausfiles/2010/12/17/dreamageddon-is-here.html

He lays out the three positions, including the moderate position. The problem with the so-called DREAM act is that it's so full of loopholes and unenforceable provisions that it's tantamount to a full amnesty; i.e., the "ALL" position.

Anonymous said...

DREAM Act fails to pass the Senate.

Severn said...

The DREAM act was just defeated.

Jim Webb, so-called "Scots-Irishman" and lover of his own people, voted to turn American into a minority white country.

Anonymous said...

DING DONG THE WICKED DREAM ACT WITCH IS DEAD!!

No thanks to the "HBD-sphere-alternative right sphere" which didn't even see it on the horizon until the last minute!

Half Sigma preferred to blog about Thomas Kinkade paintings than rally troops against it.

Sailer put up a lame-ass last minute post and most of his commenters didn't even know what was going on, or which Senators needed to be targeted with calls and faxes.

Nothing on "OneSTDV" either.

It was mainstream conservatives like Michelle Malkin and Heather MacDonald who carried the water to kill Dream, not blowhard HBD'ers. More concerned with twittering endlessly about your "Game" crap than saving your goddamn country?

Of course!

All talk, no action.

Anonymous said...

The DREAM act is more politically sinister than amnesty.

Both hurt American interests, but amnesty is at least honest. The DREAM act is intentionally designed to trick goodhearted voters with all the obfuscation about kids who want to join the military or go to medical school (a fraction of the actually beneficiaries).

What we should remember is who our enemies are, and who for all their faults stood on the side of the country.

93% of Republicans in the Senate voted against it.

90% of Democrats in the Senate votes for this treasonous bill. (The only exceptions are: Tester, Baucus, Nelson, Pryor, Kay Hagan and Joe Manchin.)

James Webb appears to have voted for the bill. He was already weak on illegal immigration.

Let’s never forget this: Webb is trying to fool us with all the Scott-Irish rhetoric.

David said...

>Call and fax your senators.<

As someone once said, if you write a letter to your representative, be sure to include a ten-thousand-dollar check.

Anonymous said...

I oppose it and it looks like its gone down in the Senate. However, I knew a guy whose parents adopted him as a baby from what turned out to be a scam adoption agency. He was not born in America but had been snuck across the border from Mexico. When he was 18 he learned for the first time that he was not in fact a US citizen, he was an illegal alien subject to deportation. There is nothing in the law that allows for these sort of exceptional cases to be fixed. This guy had done everything he was suppose to do and all of a sudden he couldn't afford community college because he couldn't get a decent job. Last I heard he was still haggling with the bureauocracy just to stay in the country. That's a pretty F'ed up situation however you view it.

David said...

Relax, folks (for now).

"Time Runs Out on DREAM Act"
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2dtcfez

Merry Christmas! Head for the eggnog! :)

(Note that the link is to "Fox Latino" - this from an allegedly conservative media source. Note also the universal anger and disappointment from the MSM. Wonder why that is? Probably worth a repeat of this link [pdf]. Is it 1924 again?)

Anonymous said...

DREAM ACT has been blocked.

Democratic backers of the legislation fell short of the 60 votes to move the DREAM Act legislation forward. Democratic Sens. Mark Pryor of Arkansas, Jon Tester of Montana, Max Baucus of Montana, Kay Hagan of North Carolina, and Ben Nelson of Nebraska voted against bringing the bill to the floor; Republican Sens. Richard Lugar, Lisa Murkowski, and Robert Bennett voted for it.

The vote was 55-41.

Severn said...

I get this idea from the immigration restrictionist crowd that it is either all or nothing.

That is, either we kick out every illegal or else they will accept nothing.



Sounds like the problem is that you're not too bright.

ben tillman said...

1. Latinos were here fisrts. It is their land.

Troll quality score: 0.

ben tillman said...

Democratic backers of the legislation fell short of the 60 votes....

Gott sei dank.

Anonymous said...

I really had high hopes for Jim Webb. He is my kind of guy. I was ready to support him.

It hurts deeply that he stabbed us all in the back on this one.

Whiskey said...

OF COURSE Jim Webb voted to abolish "Whiteness" by voting for the Dream Act. He's a Democrat. That's what it is all about. SOME Republicans will not vote for the DREAM ACT, but ALL SAFE Dems will vote party line.

The Dems have been very clear. The Party line is to replace White people and discriminate against all non elite White guys. That is what being a Dem is all about.

That the Dream Act failed is proof that yes, mainstream conservatives like Malkin have power, and have used it. A recession that never ends tends to focus the mind.

Anonymous said...

Webb is trying to fool us with all the Scott-Irish rhetoric.

Well, duh.

.

Baloo said...

Sometimes the fisrts are last.

Anonymous said...

Joe Manchin is a conservative Democrat. He took over from Robert Byrd, who was pretty anti-immigration himself. It's amazing to think there are immigration restrictionists in the Democratic party. I'd be proud to call Manchin my Senator.

Murkowski sucks. I knew we'd be better off with Joe Miller.

Lugar needs to be defeated by a Tea Partier. Can't stand him.

Surprised about Scott Brown.

Good news: Conservative Democrats exist.
Bad News: So do Dick Armey Republicans..

Anonymous said...

"Sounds like the problem is that you're not too bright."

You sound both arrogant and dumb.

Whiskey said...

Manchin IIRC did not vote against the bill. He was absent. If he cared about it, he would have been there and voted AGAINST IT.

Webb, again why is anyone surprised? Really?

You have two choices: A. Choose immigration restriction, and sign on for the Tea Party package: lower taxes, military prowess, unapologetic Americana, or B. anti-War stuff and get Mexico Norte.

These are your only two choices. Vote Dem, you'll get plenty of anti-War. But you also live in Mexico as a minority, discriminated against Gringo. Vote Tea Party Republican, and you'll get maybe Sharon Angle or "Witch" Christine O'Donnell, but you'll also get a desire to close the borders at least. You'll also get plenty of support for Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Choose. Those are your only choices.

hoo said...

"Wait, the left is advancing a surreptitious initiative to alter this country's demography?!?!?"

Haven't the demographics of this country already been altered?

Everyone on here always talks about demographic change as if it is something that will happen, when in reality it already happened. Look at the demographic breakdown of people 18 and younger in this country. It already happened.

Plus, the last big amnesty was passed by Ronald Reagan.

The defeat of the Dream Act is no big accomplishment since there is already a defacto amnesty taking place. An illegal immigrant has nothing to worry about (such as getting deported) unless he/she commits a serious crime.

SF said...

Re the kid whose adoption was disallowed. There is such a thing as a private bill. {Remember the godfather? A little backsheesh and they sail right through.) I would have no objection to our lawmakers' pushing through a few private bills for the real tearjerker cases.

Anonymous said...

"It was mainstream conservatives like Michelle Malkin and Heather MacDonald who carried the water to kill Dream, not blowhard HBD'ers."

Auster actually had some very informative posts about the DREAM Act. He has been getting the word out and encouraging people to phone their senators.

I wonder where VDare was in all of this? Their site seems to be closed off to any content. I don't visit it often, but how long has it been like this?

Anonymous said...

"Surprised about Scott Brown."

You shouldn't be. Don't expect much from a himbo.

Anonymous said...

I live in Colorado. Would have been happy to have anti Dream act representation. The Republicans lost here cause of how bad the Bush administration was. Plus they were kind of flakey.

Sad, cause the media will present it as CO being a pro-amnesty crowd, when it aint. And, of course, the Democrat Senators will be all for any immigration period.

Oh well.

Glaivester said...

Whiskey:

While in some cases we may have to choose pro-war people when voting, we do not need to (a) pretend to support stupid wars, or (b) not support good candidates who are anti-immigration and anti-war.

I plan on giving lots of money to the Ron Pauls and the BJ Lawsons out there, and to try my hardest to convert other people to that position. (Even Rand Paul is somewhat more skeptical of military spending than those who compared him favorably with his father would like).

Martin B said...

"Anonymous said...

It was mainstream conservatives like Michelle Malkin and Heather MacDonald who carried the water to kill Dream, not blowhard HBD'ers. More concerned with twittering endlessly about your "Game" crap than saving your goddamn country?"

Really? "Mainstream" conservatives? What has Rush Limbaugh been saying about immigration? When has he ever made it an issue? Sean Hannity? Newt Gingrich? The National Review? They have been useless on the issue for at least 15 years.

And in what sense is Heather MacDonald a mainstream conservative? She is, in all likelihood, an HBD believer, who simply is politic enough not to admit it. She believes that christianity is supersticious idiocy, and she has said so publicly. Her views on religion are not so much different that those of Christopher Hitchens.

Anonymous said...

"Surprised about Scott Brown."

"You shouldn't be. Don't expect much from a himbo."

You misunderstand: Scott Brown voted AGAINST Dreamnesty. Despite the fact that he is up again in one of the bluest state in the country in 2012.

Also remember “centrist” Democrat Evan Bayh voted for the bill.

Full list:
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00278

Anonymous said...

Is there any evidence that phoning/writing to your federal elected officials makes any difference? Presumably they learn of electorate's opinion distributions from polling, not from the activists' correspondence that is heavily biased. What extra incentive is there to pay attention to calls and letters on impersonal matters such as DREAM Act?

Fred said...

"Really? "Mainstream" conservatives? What has Rush Limbaugh been saying about immigration? When has he ever made it an issue?"

You obviously don't listen to Limbaugh. He has consistently opposed open borders policies.

Paul Mendez said...

Is there any evidence that phoning/writing to your federal elected officials makes any difference? Presumably they learn of electorate's opinion distributions from polling, not from the activists' correspondence that is heavily biased. What extra incentive is there to pay attention to calls and letters on impersonal matters such as DREAM Act?

Writing/phoning/visiting make a HUGE difference.

The problem with a poll is that it does not measure intensity of opinion.

For example, if I were polled on gay marriage I would say I'm against it. But I would not change my vote or donate money based on that issue.

When people are passionate enough to contact their elected representatives, that tells the politician they are serious.

CharlieBarlie said...

Anon asked: "Is there any evidence that phoning/writing to your federal elected officials makes any difference? Presumably they learn of electorate's opinion distributions from polling, not from the activists' correspondence that is heavily biased."

Anon, you are way wrong. Politicians care not about "percent who take position A" but something more like percent who take position A X (the intensity of their attitude)-squared!

So the bottom line is you need to convince them you are a zealot. Calling and emailing is very helpful to that.

(Happily, on this issue "our side" is actually more intense than the other side. Seriously, it's true. This notion of people invading our country and other people saying hey let's not do anything about it really pisses off a decent number of us. It's some ancient territorial instinct--well grounded in biological and social reality I would say. So on DREAM, polling showed that its schmalziness actually won a majority of voters. But still the politicians realized that we antis were the ones who REALLY care about the issue.)

David Davenport said...

I live in Colorado. Would have been happy to have anti Dream act representation. ...

Did you vote for Tom Tancredo last month?

Sad, cause the media will present it as CO being a pro-amnesty crowd, when it aint.

So why didn't Tom Tancredo get more votes?

SF said...

The 55 yes votes included three democrats defeated in the last election--Feingold, Lincoln and Specter; two retiring Democrates replaced by Republicans--Bayh and Dorgan; and one Republican defeated in the primary--Bennett of Utah. So it is likely that the Dream Act would only get 49 votes without the lame ducks.

Anonymous said...

The problem with that approach is you often get left with nothing.

Hoo, your statement is an example of the idiocy that has gotten us to where we are.

We have laws that should be enforced ALL the time not just when one group deems them worthy.