GOP Spanish Language Ads Blame Dems for Bill to make aliens into felons

[Az]

I don't know. I only saw that sort of blatant lying in my former country, and here, in remote areas.

[Ramo]

Where did they lie?

The ad says:

Reid's Democrat allies voted to treat millions of hard-working immigrants ... as felons.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0414immig-ads0414.html

Despite the fact that 82% of House Democrats voted against Sensenbrenner's legislation, while 92% of Republicans supported it.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo


The ad says:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0414immig-ads0414.html

Despite the fact that 82% of House Democrats voted against Sensenbrenner's legislation, while 92% of Republicans supported it.

Well they did block the Republican effort to have the felon provision removed from the bill. I'm just curious why everyone seems to be shocked that a political ad might be playing politics.

[Dinner]

Not just playing politics but lying and deliberately trying to mislead people.

[DinoDoc]

Lying? Doubtful. We already covered that. Manipulate? I thought that was the express purpose of all such ads. Though I might have focused on the Democratic attempt to kill the Senate effort at compromise in the ads myself.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Though I might have focused on the Democratic attempt to kill the Senate effort at compromise in the ads myself.

True dat

From Evans Novak Report

* Reid blocks immigration compromise over Kennedy's objections

* Frist appears powerless in immigration debate

Congress:


Immigration: The downfall of the immigration reform and border security bill in the U.S. Senate demonstrated the power that Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) wields.

1) The Washington Post was correct in editorializing that Democrats had killed the immigration bill, but not all Democrats were to blame. It was Reid who decided that immigration is better used as a political issue than a legislative one, hence his decision to block all amendments, leading to the bill's death on the floor.

2) At a meeting of principals, Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) proposed a compromise by which some amendments to toughen the bill would receive a vote on the floor. Senators Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), the bill's sponsors, were both open to the compromise, as were Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and John Cornyn (R-Tex.), who wanted to amend the bill. But Reid refused. When his refusal sent Kennedy into an angry tirade, Reid left the room. Apparently, Kennedy really wanted a bill, period -- or at least he put on a pretty good show of wanting one.

3) Reid had been the most measured in his rhetoric about the prematurely heralded compromise bill by Senators Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) and Mel Martinez (R-Fla.). One can only speculate, but Reid probably would have acted to kill any bill. Republicans' insistence on amendments only made his task easier.

4) Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) took Reid's side. He reportedly remarked to a colleague that he didn't care whether a bill passed because Democrats would gain three Senate seats this fall and return to construct an immigration bill as they liked. Schumer was previously the architect of the bend-don't-break strategy that cost Democrats badly on the issue of judicial nominations. But on immigration, his strategy just might be the right one. Unlike the judicial issue, on which he managed to unleash the Right's anger at his own party, Schumer and Reid are actually harnessing the Right's rage over the immigration issue to unleash it against Republicans.

5) The comments of House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Sunday--that a guest-worker bill would be inappropriate until border security had been finished--represents a change of direction, a new recognition that the immigration bill is dead. Senators rejected cloture on a stand-alone border-enforcement bill after the compromise on the immigration bill died. This could become a weapon for Republicans in some races. No Democrat supported the enforcement bill, although several Republicans as well voted against it. Most Republican senators apparently don't understand the political benefit of putting Democrats on the record against border security.

6) The result was a wasted week of the legislative calendar, and the pathetic sight of majority Republicans on the floor whining about amendments as if they were members of the minority. Frist is mostly to blame for this outcome, as he appears to have lost control of the Senate. (Reid and Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) are the most powerful at the moment. Reid has already gotten the better of Specter now on both asbestos litigation reform and immigration, even though Specter has won on Supreme Court confirmations. )

7) In this immigration debate, Frist had already failed the minute he turned the floor over to Specter, letting the Democrat-inspired Judiciary Committee bill come up as a substitute to his own bill. Were he more assertive, Frist would have scuttled Specter's bill as a Democratic product that could never pass, and proceeded to his own border security bill. Senators could have added guest-worker amendments on the floor. Common sense dictates that the immigration bill most likely to pass on the floor is one that is constructed on the floor, amendment by amendment. The Judiciary Committee just was not a good place to build a passable bill, because four or five of the Republicans on the committee were in agreement with the Democrats on key provisions liberalizing immigration law.

8) The immigration saga is the latest proof that Frist is not working from an agenda--seeking to accomplish specific policy goals--but instead sees himself as a legislative traffic cop, a dealmaker who exchanges promises of floor time and lets the Senate take up whatever bills come down the pike. Compounding Republicans' problems is President Bush, who has demonstrated a similar lack of leadership generally. Conservatives are learning now that they must treat Frist and Bush almost as enemies and employ threats in order to get anything out of them. This is why some of the Republicans put a hold on the debt limit recently in order to exact promises of floor time for certain budget process reforms.

9) A note: Reid, on the other side, has shown his skill once again at dragging out the legislative calendar. Despite a 10-seat disadvantage in the upper chamber of Congress, he has figured out numerous ways of milking the clock, draining away the last precious days of the large GOP Senate majority. The entire week he managed to waste on the immigration bill was a serious accomplishment. Reid likewise forced the waste of an entire week on the asbestos issue.

[Arrian]

Only idiots trust what political ads say. "We're great! They suck!" is all they're gonna say. If you want to find out about candidates on the election, do some friggin' research on the net, try to cancel out the biased bull**** and come up with an approximation of the truth. Vote accordingly.

-Arrian

[Ramo]

Edit: cross-post...

Nonsense. Reid blocked the addition of Amendments, but Frist blocked the Hagel-Martinez compromise from coming to floor. The Senate Compromise had the votes to pass, but wasnt seen as authoritarian enough by Frist et al, so they successfully filibustered by IIRC every member of the GOP caucus. McCain-Kennedy (the same basic bill that easily passed Committee) also probably would pass the floor if it werent for GOP filibusters.

Which is fine with me, since the compromise still wouldve denied a pathway to citizenship to millions. Even McCain-Kennedy had its flaws. Better to see immigration legislation under a Democratic Congress.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo
Better to see immigration legislation under a Democratic Congress.

Isn't that what Ogie's post said. That the Democrats view the issue as a better political issue than a legistlative one.

[Ramo]

No. That's my opinion. I oppose Hagel Martinez. Reid doesn't. And I don't see the distinction between political and legislative. I don't see the point of passing an evil bill just to pass something. I'd prefer to see slightly less evil folks making legislation.

For the second time, there were 38 votes for cloture on Hagel-Martinez. They were all Democrats. It was Republican obstructionism that prevented it from getting to the floor.

[Ramo]

Well they did block the Republican effort to have the felon provision removed from the bill. I'm just curious why everyone seems to be shocked that a political ad might be playing politics.

It's pretty sad that you're an apologist for this kind of dishonesty.

I challenge you to find a single Dem ad as deceptive as this one this election cycle.

[Arrian]

The Dems aren't nearly as good at deception. It's one reason why they lose.

-Arrian

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo
No. That's my opinion. I oppose Hagel Martinez. Reid doesn't. And I don't see the distinction between political and legislative. I don't see the point of passing an evil bill just to pass something. I'd prefer to see slightly less evil folks making legislation.

I don't think that the motives for Democrats trying to kill a bill that would have given a pathway for citizenship to millions are nearly that pure. I'd lean toward a mixture of self-preservation (hence the dogged oposition to amendments that would have been defeated), desire to make Frist's life more difficult, and a dash of wanting to keep the issue alive in an election year. But then maybe I'm just a cynic.

[Ramo]

For the third time, Frist and his caucus (including Hagel and Martinez) killed Hagel-Martinez. The only people who voted for cloture were Democrats. And it would've passed the full Senate if it weren't for the GOP filibuster.