I haven’t located one U.S. voter who “voted” in any “New York Times” and/or “CBS” poll, but the New York Times hasn’t lost any time in declaring:
…Half of Americans say they are ready to transform the process for selecting new immigrants as proposed in the bill, giving priority to job skills and education levels over family ties to the United States, which have been the foundation of the immigration system for four decades.
Point by point, large majorities expressed support for measures in the legislation that has been under debate since Monday in the Senate.
The nationwide telephone poll did not ask respondents about the immigration bill itself, but there were questions about its most significant provisions. It was conducted May 18 to 23 with 1,125 adults, and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
The bill, which is backed by President Bush and a bipartisan group of senators, would allow illegal immigrants who were in the United States before Jan. 1 of this year to obtain legal status…
Interesting, the “poll” was conducted beginning at a date before the Amnesty bill (S.B. 1348) was even made public. And, soon afterward, I strongly doubt that those telephoned had much knowledge to any as to what was in the proposed legisislation.
No one called me. I’m a U.S. citizen and a registered voter. No one I know who is a citizen and who is registered to vote was contacted in regards any “poll” by the NYT and/or CBS, either.
BUT, in the case of this “New York Times poll” and “CBS poll,” unless they can substantiate (and I don’t anticipate they are going to) that they monitored individual responses by individual U.S. voter registration, then their “poll results” reflect nothing other than a concerted effort to misrepresent U.S. VOTER opinion — since this “immigration bill” (Amnesty bill, S.B. 1348) would affect U.S. voters who would bear the abnormal and overwhelming burdens created by this Amnesty, then U.S. voter opinion is what’s significant regarding the Amnesty bill and it isn’t what’s identified by this NYT and/or CBS “poll” process.
George Bush is the best President — and our Liberal Senate (both Democrats and RINOs) are the best Senate — that Mexico, Cuba, Venezuela, China (among others) ever had as reflected by the “telephone” “opinion” that the New York Times and CBS are eager to publicize.
Because I’m sure their citizens — many of whom are in the U.S. and many of those are here illegally and when they aren’t, they aren’t too concerned about what liabilities their demands place upon the U.S. taxpayers — I’m sure these “telephoned” from wherever with whatever intents are eager to “support” and “vote” for (enthusiastically) the Amnesty bill. It’s a crying shame that the U.S. has an Executive and Legislative Branch eager to do their heavy lifting for them and then dump the results on U.S. taxpayers afterward.
From Tom Tancredo‘s Newsletter, these facts — for a change — composed by by U.S. voters who, refreshingly, are concerned on behalf of U.S. citizens:
Here are the most outrageous aspects of the bill.
* Automatic amnesty for the 15-20 million illegal aliens living here today! All they have to do is fill out the paperwork and 24 hours later they are legal.
* Cost: $2.5 trillion to the taxpayer — the bill bankrupts the nation.
* Thirty to forty million new immigrants in about 8 years.
* Four hundred thousand guest workers every year to enter our country, take our jobs, suppress our wages, and burden our communities (and when their visas expire do you think they might join the next wave of illegal aliens).
* NO back taxes for amnestied illegals.
* NO English requirement for amnestied illegals.
* NO medical exams for amnestied illegals.
* Absolutely ZERO serious provisions to upgrade border security — our elite do not intend to secure the nation. In fact, buried in the bill is language that expresses the “sense of Congress” that believes the dangerous Security and Prosperity Partnership for North America should “accelerate”! They are trading our sovereignty for the North America Union without the consent of the people.
The business community actually had the audacity to complain the bill was too burdensome on them because it required them to verify employees online! They feel no responsibility for the consequences their cheap labor has been to this nation.
This “North American Union” entity is not something I’m entirely sure about (so far) as a fixed “thing” but as to various elements that all work toward creating such a process as a “North American union,” I recognize that these are already in place and more intended for the future without “consent of the people”. Worse, the covert nature of how these dealings have been and are being created and funded produces a great deal of mistrust among U.S. voters as aspects become apparent. Worse, by means of public funding (U.S. Departments of Transportation, Parks and Homeland Security especially).
Thus, the White House, the Senate can both deny that such a thing exists as the “North American Union” and still be correct, but they can’t deny that aspects that create such a union are not working if not mostly in place already.
So, I’m concerned enough about this enough to at least give those with information about this enough time and respect to share what they know and not to ridicule them.
But the Amnesty bill evidences the intents and methods involved of just such a covert process. That ethnic supremacy groups were involved in “private meetings” with “a gang of 12” in the Senate and in the White House, among lobbyists and those in service to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (not a friend to the “consent of the people”), that this entire process has developed as it has and is being promoted as it is (NYT, CBS, ethnic supremacy individuals and groups, foreign governments, illegal aliens and perhaps other criminal interests) is not a good indication that those responsible for the Amnesty bill have the best interests (nor interests at all) of the citizens of the United States of America in mind.
U. S. Rep. Steve King speaks out in common sense on behalf ot U.S. citizens and confronts the beastie: