• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Daily Dobbs

Sandhusker

Well-known member
NEW YORK (CNN) -- President Bush's assurances that we'll all be "just fine" if he and Congress can work out an economic stimulus package seem a little hollow this morning.

Much like Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke's assurances last May that the subprime mortgage meltdown would be contained and not affect the broader economy. And it seems Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has spent most of the past year trying to influence Chinese economic policy rather than setting the direction of U.S. economic policy.

There is no question that Bush, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid will quickly come up with an economic stimulus package simply because they can no longer ignore our economic and financial crisis. That economic stimulus plan will amount to about 1 percent of our nation's gross domestic product, an estimated $150 billion.

But all of us should recognize that the stimulus package will be inadequate to drive sustainable growth in our $13 trillion economy. An emergency Fed rate cut and an economic stimulus plan are short-term responses to our complex economic problems, nothing more than bandages for a hemorrhaging economy.

Bush, Pelosi, Reid and the presidential candidates of both parties have an opportunity now, and I believe an obligation, to adjust the public policy mistakes of the past quarter-century that have led to this crisis. And only through courageous policy decisions will we be able to steer this nation's economy away from the brink of outright disaster.

Don't Miss
Lou's new book 'Independents Day'
Previous Lou Dobbs commentaries
We all have to acknowledge that our problems were in part brought on by the failure of our government to regulate the institutions and markets that are now in crisis. The irresponsible fiscal policies of the past decade have led to a national debt that amounts to $9 trillion. The irresponsible so-called free trade policies of Democratic and Republican administrations over the past three decades have produced a trade debt that now amounts to more than $6 trillion, and that debt is rising faster than our national debt. All of which is contributing to the plunge in the value of the U.S. dollar.

At precisely the point in our history in which this nation has become ever more dependent on foreign producers for everything from clothing to computers to technology to energy, our weakened dollar is making the price of an ever-increasing number of imported goods even more expensive.

All Americans will soon have to face a bitter and now obvious truth: Our national, political and economic leaders have squandered this nation's wealth, and the price of this profligacy is enormous, and the bill has just come due for all of us.

Bernanke endorsed the concept of a short-term economic stimulus package, but he cautioned that the money must be spent correctly: "You'd hope that [consumers] would spend it on things that are domestically produced so that the spending power doesn't go elsewhere."

Just what would you have us spend it on? The truth is that consumers spend most of their money on foreign imports, and any stimulus package probably would be stimulating foreign economies rather than our own. Imports, for example, account for 92 percent of our non-athletic footwear, 92 percent of audio video equipment, 89 percent of our luggage and 73 percent of power tools. In fact, between 1997 and 2006, only five of the 114 industries examined in a U.S. Business and Industry Council report gained market share against import competition.

And let's be honest and straightforward, as I hope our president and the candidates for president will be: This stimulus will not prevent a recession. It may ease the pain for millions of Americans, but a recession we will have. The question is how deep, how prolonged and how painful will it be. Unfortunately, we're about to find out how committed and capable our national leaders are at mitigating that pain and producing realistic policy decisions for this nation that now stands at the brink.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Lou really tore GW's rear- as GW and Condiliza are out promoting that we need more "free trade" and to sell out more of the country to help out the economy... :roll: :( :( :mad: :mad: :mad:

But apparently the majority of the folks listening are like me and don't agree with GW as this is the return on the poll he ran during the hour the show was on....



Do you believe, as the President and members of his Administration do, that the cure for what ails the economy is more free trade?
Yes 4% 272
No 96% 6144
Total Votes: 6416

When will that idiot in the White House get it thru his head- that his last 7 years of trade and economic policy caused this economic disaster...At least more and more worldwide politicians and experts are now putting the cause/blame right back where it belongs - on GW's lap.....
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
GW doesn't care what you or I think. He's made his pals billions of dollars at the expense of the American taxpayer and with the blood of American military. He'll leave the White House and live a long, happy life without ever being held responsible for what he's done.

Voters apparently aren't interested in a third party candidate. From a Gallup Poll:

Bottom Line

There is no way of judging precisely at this point the impact or potential success of a third-party or independent candidate, were he or she to jump into the race. Much will depend on how the remainder of the primary campaign plays out, who the eventual major-party nominees are, and what the state of the nation is by later this spring or into the summer.

When Perot jumped into the campaign in the spring of 1992, he moved to the top of the national horse-race polls, pulling in more potential voters than either President Bush or Clinton. Perot later left the race and then re-entered it, creating a highly unusual set of campaign dynamics, but ended up gaining 19% of the 1992 popular presidential vote.

The data reviewed above suggest that the environment would not be nearly as propitious this year as it was for Perot that year. It is true that Americans are broadly dissatisfied this year with both the state of the nation and the economy, as they were in 1992. But Americans at this juncture seem much more willing to say that the current crop of candidates running in the major parties have discussed good solutions to the nation's problems and, as a result, there is a high level of satisfaction with those currently running. Thus, were Bloomberg to jump into the race, his first job would be to convince voters that he would bring to the table something that the major party candidates have not.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/103846/Voters-Clamoring-ThirdParty-Candidacy-Year.aspx
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
You think Hillary gives a rat's patoot what we think?

I think the Democratic candidates are all considerably more concerned about what I think than the Republicans. They grew up in what I'd consider middle class homes. Their families worked for their dollars, saved their money, struggled to send their kids to college. John Edwards worked to put himself through college. Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth. He never wanted for anything. There was always someone around to clean up the mess he mad. Today it's our military cleaning up after your esteemed president.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
ff said:
Sandhusker said:
You think Hillary gives a rat's patoot what we think?

I think the Democratic candidates are all considerably more concerned about what I think than the Republicans. They grew up in what I'd consider middle class homes. Their families worked for their dollars, saved their money, struggled to send their kids to college. John Edwards worked to put himself through college. Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth. He never wanted for anything. There was always someone around to clean up the mess he mad. Today it's our military cleaning up after your esteemed president.

Not only the military--but now the taxpayers of the country have to suffer and clean up his economic mess for GW giving his elitist buddies free run at the cookie jar- and we'll be doing it for a long time...

Hillary might not be any better- but as I hear an awful lot of folks saying "nothing could be worse than what GW's done"...........
 

cutterone

Well-known member
Oh heck, Mickey Mouse just as well run for President for all the control any canidate has. Until we get the strangle hold that big business, the media, and the lobeyists have on government and our elected officals things will never change much! Ron Paul may talk the talk in some of the right direction but getting it done is another thing.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
cutterone said:
Oh heck, Mickey Mouse just as well run for President for all the control any canidate has. Until we get the strangle hold that big business, the media, and the lobeyists have on government and our elected officals things will never change much! Ron Paul may talk the talk in some of the right direction but getting it done is another thing.

Yep-- even several of the media are giving Paul and John Edwards credit for not having their entire campaigns financed by the corporate and lobbyist world.....
I still think I would like to see those 2 be their parties nominees- and send a message to D.C. and the lobbyists...But it ain't gonna happen...
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
ff said:
Sandhusker said:
You think Hillary gives a rat's patoot what we think?

I think the Democratic candidates are all considerably more concerned about what I think than the Republicans. They grew up in what I'd consider middle class homes. Their families worked for their dollars, saved their money, struggled to send their kids to college. John Edwards worked to put himself through college. Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth. He never wanted for anything. There was always someone around to clean up the mess he mad. Today it's our military cleaning up after your esteemed president.

Take a look at illegal immigration. There is no doubt what the majority of the populace thinks - then take a look at your 3 front-runners and then tell me again they care what America thinks.

You might ought to check out Hillary's upbringing, too. I don't think she was raised on spam and spaghetti-o's. And don't be fooled for a second - she doesn't want to be President for anybody other than herself. It's all about power with her.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Take a look at illegal immigration. There is no doubt what the majority of the populace thinks - then take a look at your 3 front-runners and then tell me again they care what America thinks.

Ain't no Repubs that thrill me on that one either except Paul.... McCain partnered with Kennedy and Bush for their amnesty bill--Huckleberry was spending taxpayer dollars building living centers and offices to help find illegals work-- and Rumney was in favor of sanctuary cities and had illegals working on his house :shock: :shock:

They're all talking the big talk now- but I have to remember the last Republican that ran for President that talked big- but will go down in my book as the most corporate corrupt, worst law enforcing President I've seen in the 50 years I've been involved in following politics...
He's even making Tricky Dick look like a Saint....
 

rider

Well-known member
Who do we have to blame for all the candidates coming from wealthy families? In fact, you have to have money to end up running for office. Why? Is it the money that makes a candidate "better" than any ordinary Joe?

I think people often confuse money with intelligence, hard work, and now good ethics (or poor).

Why is it that people with money don't get how the middle class operates and views life? To answer for myself, because they usually end up at the top by means other than being honest, hard-working, and reliable.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
ff said:
Sandhusker said:
You think Hillary gives a rat's patoot what we think?

I think the Democratic candidates are all considerably more concerned about what I think than the Republicans. They grew up in what I'd consider middle class homes. Their families worked for their dollars, saved their money, struggled to send their kids to college. John Edwards worked to put himself through college. Bush was born with a silver foot in his mouth. He never wanted for anything. There was always someone around to clean up the mess he mad. Today it's our military cleaning up after your esteemed president.

Take a look at illegal immigration. There is no doubt what the majority of the populace thinks - then take a look at your 3 front-runners and then tell me again they care what America thinks.

You might ought to check out Hillary's upbringing, too. I don't think she was raised on spam and spaghetti-o's. And don't be fooled for a second - she doesn't want to be President for anybody other than herself. It's all about power with her.

You need to take a look at immigration. The last poll that I saw showed 58% of Americans support some sort of path to citizenship for illegals who want to become American citizens. 58% is huge. Any politican would be thrilled to have 58% of any vote.

By an even larger majority people wanted the borders secured. But the majority don't want all illegals rounded up and shipped out of the country.

Hillary's family wasn't poor. Never said she was. Middle class was the term I used and I stand by it. She can't make the changes she wants to make in the country without the power to do it. Will she win the nomination? We'll see, won't we. :D
 

Steve

Well-known member
You need to take a look at immigration. The last poll that I saw showed 58% of Americans support some sort of path to citizenship for illegals who want to become American citizens. 58% is huge. Any politican would be thrilled to have 58% of any vote.

I could call every house in Miami and get better results then that....:roll: :roll: :roll: ..for every poll that supports your opinion,.. there are two that don't...

Time Poll: Build Border Fence, Deport Illegals

Americans support building a security fence along the entire 2,000 mile U.S.- Mexican border by a landslide, a new Time magazine poll has found.

By a margin of 56 to 40 percent, respondents said they want the wall built from sea to shining sea - not just the 700 miles stipulated in the House plan, a proposal the press calls "draconian."

In more evidence that the American people want a tougher crackdown on illegal immigration than anything favored by Congress or the media, 62 percent told Time that they favored using the military to guard the border. Just 35 percent opposed.

But the poll's biggest shocker may be on the question of deporting illegals back to their native country, an option that politicians and the press say is out of the question.

Time found, however, that 47 percent of those surveyed actually favor deporting "all illegal immigrants." 49 percent were opposed.


And 51 percent said the U.S. would be "better of" if all illegals were deported and the border sealed to prevent any more from coming in. Just 38 percent disagreed.

A full 75 percent say illegals should be denied government supplied healthcare and food stamps, with 21 percent saying they should get those benefits. 69 percent say illegals shouldn't be allowed to get U.S. drivers licenses.

Lets see 47 + 58 = 100... it doesn't add up.. math doesn't lie.. so polls must be wrong then..
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
You need to take a look at immigration. The last poll that I saw showed 58% of Americans support some sort of path to citizenship for illegals who want to become American citizens. 58% is huge. Any politican would be thrilled to have 58% of any vote.

I could call every house in Miami and get better results then that....:roll: :roll: :roll: ..for every poll that supports your opinion,.. there are two that don't...

Time Poll: Build Border Fence, Deport Illegals

Americans support building a security fence along the entire 2,000 mile U.S.- Mexican border by a landslide, a new Time magazine poll has found.

By a margin of 56 to 40 percent, respondents said they want the wall built from sea to shining sea - not just the 700 miles stipulated in the House plan, a proposal the press calls "draconian."

In more evidence that the American people want a tougher crackdown on illegal immigration than anything favored by Congress or the media, 62 percent told Time that they favored using the military to guard the border. Just 35 percent opposed.

But the poll's biggest shocker may be on the question of deporting illegals back to their native country, an option that politicians and the press say is out of the question.

Time found, however, that 47 percent of those surveyed actually favor deporting "all illegal immigrants." 49 percent were opposed.


And 51 percent said the U.S. would be "better of" if all illegals were deported and the border sealed to prevent any more from coming in. Just 38 percent disagreed.

A full 75 percent say illegals should be denied government supplied healthcare and food stamps, with 21 percent saying they should get those benefits. 69 percent say illegals shouldn't be allowed to get U.S. drivers licenses.

Lets see 47 + 58 = 100... it doesn't add up.. math doesn't lie.. so polls must be wrong then..


From your quote:
Time found, however, that 47 percent of those surveyed actually favor deporting "all illegal immigrants."[/u] 49 percent were opposed.

Surely you know that 49% is more than 47%? And 49 were OPPOSED to deporting "all illegal immigrants". Just as I said: the MAJORITY doesn't want to deport all illegals.


These numbers add up. :D

LA Times/Bloomberg Poll -
"One proposal that has been discussed in Congress would allow illegal immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record, to start on a path to citizenship by registering that they are in the country, paying a fine, getting fingerprinted, and learning English, among other requirements. Do you support or oppose this, or haven't you heard enough about it to say?"

11/30-12/3/07
Support - 60%
Oppose - 15%
Unsure - 25%
 

Steve

Well-known member
ff
LA Times/Bloomberg Poll Do you support or oppose this, or haven't you heard enough about it to say?"

I could call every house in Miami and get better results then that... :roll: :roll: :roll: ..for every poll that supports your opinion,.. there are two that don't...

Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, 47.3%
Foreign born persons, 36.2%
Language other than English spoken at home, pct age 5+, 54.1%
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06037.html

I am surprised that the poll percentage was that low given the diversity of LA...

Take one in down town Spearfish and see if the results are the same :roll:
 

Steve

Well-known member
ff
"One proposal that has been discussed in Congress would allow illegal immigrants who have been living and working in the United States for a number of years, and who do not have a criminal record, to start on a path to citizenship by registering that they are in the country, paying a fine, getting fingerprinted, and learning English, among other requirements. Do you support or oppose this, or haven't you heard enough about it to say?"

I oppose it..

I would fingerprint.. take a DNA sample from every illegal arrested or detained.. then after the courts convict them of illegally entering our country.. I would fine them,, deport them.. and if the return illegally.. I would incarcerate them...

The fine should be equal to two times the cost of their share of the burden they are for our government..
 

Steve

Well-known member
Senator Jeff Sessions Sends Immigration Questionnaire To Presidential Candidates

Each question is followed by a "Yes or No" and a box for either; no space for evasive essays is provided.
It's a good questionnaire and I wish he'd sent it out sooner.

John McCain, of course, will not respond, claiming "I don't respond to hypotheticals" (even though these are not hypotheticals, they're questions about present intent) or saying "Answering difficult questions is not part of the concept of 'Straight Talk.'"

Sessions himself hasn't endorsed anyone yet, so, in theory, this can win or lose his endorsement.

REAL IMMIGRATION REFORM

A Roadmap for Demonstrating Presidential Credibility on One of America’s Most Important Issues

I. SECURE THE BORDER

1. Border Fence and National Guard: If elected President, will you secure the border, including completing construction of the 700 mile southern border fence required by the Secure Fence Act, constructing more miles if
needed, and keeping the National Guard on the border until it is secured?

2. Border Prosecutions: If elected President, will you deter illegal entry by expanding the already successful Zero Tolerance Prosecution Policy (Operation Streamline) from 3 to all 20 border sectors, and support statutory mandatory minimums for the crimes of illegal entry, reentry, and reentry after deportation for any felony?

3. Control Visa Overstays: If elected President, will you give our immigration system integrity by completing the 10-year past due exit portion of The USVISIT (Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology) system and eliminate other weaknesses in the system so that future visa overstays can be identified?

II. END THE MAGNET AT THE WORKPLACE

4. Enforceable Employer Verification System: If elected President, will you end the jobs magnet by requiring all employers to use the electronic verification system to check the legal status of all employees, reduce fraud by
decreasing the number of documents employers must accept to prove legal status, and will you offer cooperating employers a safe harbor?

5. Biometric ID Card For All Non-Citizens: If elected President, will you require a biometric (fingerprint encoded) identification card for all aliens authorized to work?

6. Eliminate Identity Theft: If elected President, will you increase security for legal workers by requiring social security earnings statements to list all employers reporting wages under an individual’s social security number so that fraudulent use of that number can be spotted and will you fight to keep using "no match notices" as evidence that employers knew they were employing an illegal alien under a social security number issued to someone else?

III. STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT

7. Form Effective Partnerships: If elected President, will you form effective immigration enforcement partnerships with state and local law enforcement by clarifying their authority to enforce federal immigration laws, deputizing state and local officers in every state (through the 287(g) program), offering a basic training course for all state and local officers, and compensating state and local entities for immigration enforcement related expenses?

8. Federal Response To State And Local Arrests: If elected President, will you promptly evaluate the 27% of prisoners that are non-citizens so that illegal alien criminals can be processed and deported at the end of their
sentences, and will you implement a mandatory federal response to state and local law enforcement when they apprehend an illegal alien for a DUI, child abuse crime, or any felony?

9. End Catch and Release: If elected President, will you put an end to the existing policy that allows illegal aliens caught inside our country to be released on bail after their arrest while they await their initial court appearance?

10. List Illegal Aliens In the NCIC: If elected President, will you immediately expand the National Crime Information Center’s (NCIC) Immigration Violators File to include: (A) aliens against whom a final order of removal has been issued; (B) aliens who have signed a voluntary departure agreement; (C) aliens who have overstayed their authorized period of stay; and (D) aliens whose visas have been revoked?

IV. DISCOURAGE SANCTUARIES

11. Deny Federal Funds: If elected President, will you encourage compliance with Federal law by implementing a reduction of at least 10% of discretionary federal grants and highway funds to cities, states, universities, and other entities that undermine Federal law by implementing sanctuary policies, issuing driver’s licenses to illegal aliens, or offering education benefits to illegal aliens (such as in-state tuition) that are not available to all legal residents and
citizens?

12. Close Financial Loopholes: If elected President, will you rewrite the Treasury regulations to close the loophole that allows illegal aliens to open U.S. based bank accounts?

V. IMPROVE THE LEGAL IMMIGRATION PROCESS

13. Replace Visa Lottery and Chain Migration with Merit Based Immigration System: If elected President, will you eliminate the visa lottery program and change current preference categories that guarantee automatic entry for aging parents and extended family members and replace it with a system that fairly and objectively evaluates at least 50% of applicants based on characteristics such as education, skills, English ability, and age?

14. Pathway to Citizenship: If elected President, will you take a pathway to citizenship for illegal aliens off the table?

15. Seek Necessary Authority: If elected President, will you ask Congress for necessary laws or funds to execute these commitments?


By signing this document, I express to the American people that I understand the challenges of ending illegal immigration, I am personally committed to that goal, and I will take the actions reasonable and necessary to achieve it.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
A new opinion poll by Zogby International indicates Americans are hardly pleased with the Bush administration on the subject of illegal immigration.

The poll, cited on CNN's "Lou Dobbs Tonight" program yesterday, noted a huge majority – 81 percent – believes local and state police should help federal authorities enforce laws against illegal immigration. Only 14 percent disagreed.

Voters were also asked, "Do you support or oppose the Bush administration's proposal to give millions of illegal aliens guest worker status and the opportunity to become citizens?" Only 35 percent gave their support, and 56 percent said no.

"A majority opposed illegal immigration," pollster John Zogby told CNN. "In fact, when you combine those two terms, 'illegal and immigration,' it really conjures up a considerable amount of negatives. And, in fact, we find that it's really across the board."

According to the report, the greatest opponents of illegal immigration are Democrats, African-Americans, women and people with household income below $75,000, those with the most to lose in the job market.

When it came to the status of the nation's borders, respondents were asked, "Do you agree or disagree that the federal government should deploy troops on the Mexican border as a temporary measure to control illegal immigration?" A clear majority – 53 percent – agree, while 40 percent disagree.

"The Minuteman program highlighted the fact that we need more tighter border security," Phil Kent of American Immigration Control Foundation told the network. "So I think these numbers again are good. It's a good civics lesson for the American people. It shows our elected leaders that we want action."

In summing up her report, CNN correspondent Lisa Sylvester noted, "So, while the public wants tougher borders, politicians are pushing to leave them open. A real disconnect."
 
Top