Thursday, May 17, 2007

Good news department

State Senate wants proof of residency for driver’s license
The hot-button illegal immigration issue bubbled just below the surface Tuesday as the Oregon Senate voted to require proof of legal residence to get a driver’s license, a move which could deny driving privileges to thousands of undocumented workers.

The Senate vote, which was far from the last word on the subject this session, drew negative reviews from various quarters, including immigrants rights advocates, civil libertarians and Gov. Ted Kulongoski’s office.

This is good news that we seem to be moving forward on at least this bill. No more will illegal aliens get a pass when driving their meth up I-5.

But let's not count our anchor babies before they pop out, this bill is not yet law and we need to keep the pressure on to get it a vote in the House and a signature by Kulongoski.

13 comments:

R Huse said...

You know, the amazing thing is that there is any controversy at all about this. I think most people believe that at some point citizenship should mean something. Most countries tend to protect the privileges of that citizenship quite zealously. Europe tends to come to mind. How did we get to a point where there is controversy over this kind of thing?

Anonymous said...

this sounds great, you have helped make the world a better place

Scottiebill said...

This bill has to go across Teddy's desk before it becomes law. Look for Teddy to veto it.

Anonymous said...

Its only a matter of time till folks link the Gas Price problem with our having 20 Million Illegal Aliens here sucking up the short supply with their 80's something beaters that also puke tons of pollution.

How about Bumper Stickers explaining that cure?

Anonymous said...

how bout we buy teddy a sombrero and then hand it to him when he veto's the bill.

Take That!!! said...

Ha ha you punk-a$$ anti-immigrant bitches lost. HA!

Senators, White House reach deal on immigration

A bipartisan group of senators has come to an agreement with the White House over an immigration reform bill that would give the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the US a path to citizenship and strengthen border security.

The draft immigration bill announced today was crafted after months of negotiations among the most liberal and conservative senators and White House officials. The bill's top aim is securing the nation's borders through stepped-up enforcement measures and severe sanctions against employers to "stop the magnet" that leads immigrants to enter the country illegally, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) said in a televised news conference today.

Rick Hickey said...

Ted has a similar Bill in the House, he will sign a secure ID Bill.

Some in the Senate claim they have reached a compromise, their has been no Vote yet and majority of House will not approve, especially majority Democrats who do not like $5,000 fines and waiting at least 8 years to become a Voting Citizen and many Dems are now realising how much this hurts working American Families.

This was a SALES PITCH to convince YOU lefties that they are actually doing something, they will NOT, thier priority is to get re-elected not what the extreme far-left/anarchists want.

Polish Immigrant said...

I don't think he cares much about what I think but I thought I would still send the following letter to Senator Smith:

"As a legal immigrant of 19 years I deplore you to vote against the so called immigration reform bill. Z Visas are amnesty for people who came to our country illegally unlike many others, including my family members, who are patiently waiting in long lines to come here legally. I hope you will not tell them that the best way to attain American dream is to cheat."

BEAR said...

Mr. Daniel, the bad news is that the U.S. Senate declared their intent make everyone (including terrorists) a legal resident. Ted can sign away, and say he's against illegal aliens. So sad.

Anonymous said...

Remember, many of you belong to a party that nominated a terrrorist as their Senatorial candidate in Virginia in 1994. Those on the right celebrated him not in spite of, but because he was a terrorist.

R Huse said...

Thus showing some of us dont understand what exactly constitues a terrorist. Oliver North? Come on.

And all this time I thought it was just the illegal in illegal alien that seemed baffling to them. Oh well.

Anonymous said...

By any legitimate definition of a terrorist, Oliver North qualifies: He supported a group that deliberately targeted and killed civilians, and broke the law in doing so. That makes him a terrorist.

That you can't see him as a terrorist is sad.

R Huse said...

Actually no, that means he dealt with terrorists, not that he is one. Iran is a nation that supports terrorism, that is quite true. North did deal with factions of the Iranian government, that is also true. However, that does not by extension make him a terrorist any more than it makes Nancy Pelosi a terrorist for her recent meetings in Syria.

There is really nothing sad about it, I simply think its a little silly to use a word so losely that has no meaning, and then use that lose definition to basically slander a party.

Likewise just because many of the people on your side of the argument are members of the Democratic party, that doesn't make you all racists simply because of the parties tendency to have racist or racialist candidates (Al Sharpton, Robert Byrd, Fritz Hollings, the guy who put the confederate flag on the State capitol in the first place).