Immigration - Classic on why we lose

[sandnsea]

This is going to be totally incoherent. Just spewing as thoughts come to my head. But this immigration issue is just classic party disconnect, people not knowng the issues, and a certain set of Democrats who buy right into the right wing labeling. With a measure of racism, economic angst and free market confusion thrown in. O'Bierne was actually spouting the driving wages down line, when we all know that's exactly what Republicans want. Talk about spin.

Where has anybody got the idea Democrats support open immigration or even across the board amnesty?

Why do so many not know the difference between guest worker and path to legalization?

What is wrong with our party that they don't know people out here are confused? Why do they reinforce the confusion calling all of it "guest worker"? Why oh why, and JK did it too, do they say "jobs Americans won't do", especially when so many are out of work. Especially in states like Ohio that we need to win.

Why don't they emphasize doubling border security, or making increased enforcement on business?

The whole thing drives me crazy.

[TayTay]

1. It's those HB-1's.

Sigh. There is a lot of pressure in some states to get allowances for seasonal and guest workers in for some jobs. Sen. Kerry has consistently backed this when it comes up. (He's for certain restrictive expansions of HB-1 workers.)

That said, it's not a green card or blanket amnesty. I think you are right, the Dems have to find better language to talk about what they mean. It's not a free ride.

Do you like the Kennedy-McCain bill that is the basis for the legislation under consideration this week?

EDit: Thanks for not noticing my dyslexia. I meant h1-b's. Sigh. I am spontaneously dyslexic, apparently. Sigh!

[MH1]

3. About H1-Bs

Interesting blog post here (eweek):
http://blog.eweek.com/blogs/rip_and_read/archive/2006/03/28/8675.aspx

and this
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060328/ap_on_go_co/immigration_high_tech

BUT I think the low-skilled workers are another class of visa - H1-Bs are knowledge worker types. I think they are calling the low-skill version "H1-A" but I could be wrong.

I don't want to see expansion of H1-Bs. WTF is wrong with educating and decently paying our own workers? (Okay MH don't get started....)

[ginnyinWI]

5. I like it

I read it straight from Kennedy's website and think it's a good fix for the problem. All except the word "guest"; that word and the word "worker" don't really go together. I'd rather see "temporary worker" or "probationary worker" or something else. Guest implies that you don't have to work--you're the guest! Maybe that's just me and my etiquette books. :blush:

People will still have to earn the right to be here--it's not a free ride--and it will still be tough, with all the stuff they have to do. I'm really pro-immigration, because I believe that America should share its wealth and make room for any who want to live here. I may be a bit prejudiced because of knowing one immigrant well--my son-in-law came here from Tunisia, and I've watched his struggles with red tape for several years.

[sandnsea]

7. Depends on the implementation

If we really put enough pressure on business to stop hiring illegals and really beef up the borders, then maybe it has a chance of working. I worry what will happen at the end of the temporary visa. What makes them think people are just going to go home if they don't become citizens? And why do they not couple this with Latin American economic reform? I know there aren't as many people to do the nasty jobs, but a real free market wage economy would only work if they were forced to increase wages to get people to do these jobs. But we don't have that or a minimum wage increase, and nobody calls the right on it. And I just don't know how they think a minimum wage immigrant is going to live any easier than a US minimum wage worker. Whether we need the workers or not, it's just stupid for them to say our workers don't want jobs when so many can't find work, it really offends people. Especially when some have those jobs and know they can't make ends meet without benefits, so no immigrant is going to be able to either. It's like inviting in another generation of food stamps recipients. I think between the way we're presenting it and the manipulations of the right, we're going to lose votes over this.

McCain-Kennedy is the best we've got, it's all going to depend on enforcement. And change in international labor laws wouldn't hurt either.

[kerrygoddess]

11. Feinstein Measure for a Pilot Earned Adjustment Program for Agri Workers

This was passed in the Judiciary Monday and inserted in the immigration reform plan:

Senate Judiciary Committee Approves Feinstein Measure Establishing a Pilot Earned Adjustment Program for Agriculture Workers
March 27th, 2006 @ 5:04 pm

The Senate Judiciary Committee today approved an amendment sponsored by U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) that would establish a pilot earned adjustment program for agriculture workers.

“The thrust of this proposal is to create a legalized workforce for the agriculture industry,” Senator Feinstein said. “This is a pilot earned adjustment program. It would sunset after 5 years. It’s a workable program. It will provide the agriculture industry with a legal workforce and offer agriculture workers a path to citizenship. So I’m hopeful that this proposal will receive broad, bipartisan support.”

The UFW sent out a statement saying they believe “reforms contained in the Feinstein amendment would improve the lives of farm workers and provide the agricultural industry with a legal and stable work force. Sen. Feinstein’s thoughtful amendment is a welcomed addition to Chairman Specter’s proposal.”

Following is a summary of the bill:

· Pilot program to allow certain undocumented agricultural workers to legalize their immigration status in the United States and to modify the current H2A program.

· The first step requires that undocumented agricultural workers apply for a “blue card” if they can demonstrate that they have worked in American agriculture for at least 150 work days within the previous two years before 12/31/05.

· The second step requires that after a “blue card” holder can demonstrate that they have worked in American agriculture for an additional 150 work days per year for 3 years, or 100 work days per year for 5 years, they will then be eligible for a green card.

· Employment will be verified through employer issued itemized statements, pay stubs, W-2 forms, employer letters, contracts or agreements, employer sponsored health care, time cards or payment of taxes.

· This program will be capped at 1.5 million blue cards in five years (without a per year cap) and sunset after five years.

· Individuals may participate in employment other than agriculture so long as the worker satisfies the 100 or 150 workdays each year.

· Blue card holders (including spouses and children) will be allowed to travel in and out of the United States.

· Spouses of blue card workers will be eligible to apply for their own work permit and their employment will not be limited to agricultural employment.

· Aliens participating in the program will be required to pay a fine of $500, show that they are current on their taxes, and that they have not been convicted of any crime that involves bodily injury, the threat of serious bodily injury, or harm to property in excess of $500.

· The Department of Homeland Security will determine the adequate application fee necessary to offset the costs of this pilot program.

· To avoid backlogs, aliens who receive a green card under this program will be exempt from the overall numerical limitations on visas (i.e., 675,000 visas) and the country numerical limitations for Mexico, India, China and the Philippines.

· H2A modifications shall be those contained in the AgJOBS bill and shall include a study to determine an appropriate cap.

http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2435

[MH1]

2. I agree, I think.

This immigration issue has been brewing for some time....I wish our side had put together a more coherent message.

Just to throw another point in the mix that I've been thinking about: there is a constant drumbeat from the corporate world that they can't find the highly skilled workers they need. Well I would submit that a part of that is that the path to achievement has been broken for many in this country. An acquaintance of mine went to a tech institute to learn some basic computer stuff. He should have been able to get an entry level job at a help desk or something. He then would have learned on the job, taken additional training, and so on and ultimately become either a) one of those higher skilled workers those corps are looking for; or b) competition at the middle of the scale that would motivate others to improve their skills and move up to that "highly skilled" range. But, he never found that entry-level job. He went back to doing a couple semi-skilled, low paying part time jobs. Meanwhile, the entry-level job that should have been available to him, is offshored, and oh btw, my competition is coming not from American citizens, but folks here on H1B visas. Now, I like those folks personally, as individuals, a lot - but I'd rather have someone who already lived here have a better chance than what they seem to be getting.

[kerrygoddess]

4. Kennedy's floor speech today

Did anyone catch it - he laid out what the plan is all about - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=2453

[wisteria]

6. I caught that Kerry statement too. I am not inclined to agree with it

either. I would like to know how they actually know for a fact that American's won't take the jobs. I think this sounds more like company speak to me. And, if these jobs are actually so bad that Americans won't take them then they must be just awful. If this is the situation, then aren't we as a country doing a disservice to these illegals by subjecting them to near slave like work and pay. Please don't misunderstand, I think we need to continue to be a country that is open to all good people who want to come here and work. That doesn't mean however, that we should ignore the fact that many who are here broke the law by coming into American illegally to work, and in turn, take American jobs away. Other visitors to our country must follow the rules, so should they.(those illegals here already are another problem that I won't get into now.)What I am trying to say is we need to get a hold on this problem, secure the boarders and allow the Mexican immigrants into the country only after security issues have been addressed and the person is cleared for entry. There should be a requirement that residency in this county along with employment is only available to those willing to become US citizens.
Dem's really need to answer the economic question clearly. Will a lack of immigrants willing to take on the jobs that Americans "don't want" impact our economy in a negative way. Or will displaced American's who have seen some of their jobs go to overseas companies, fill the vacancies?
Who actually against the most in situations like this?

[sandnsea]

8. That's sort of what McCain-Kennedy does

I personally don't have a problem with somebody coming here any way they can, I understand and don't have a personal need to punish them. However, the M-K Bill does punish them, sort of, it does have a $2,000 fine. Other than that, I agree with what you're saying completely. The M-K Bill does push people to become citizens, I'm not sure it's required to get whatever document in the first place, but it definitely should.

On the impact on our economy. Republicans always fight raising minimum wage because market forces should set it. Well how can market forces set it if it's artificially low because of a constant flow of desperate people? I also agree about subjecting people to near slave work and pay, what kind of people knowingly do that to others? It's sick.

How long are we going to let other people slave like this so we can buy dollar store junk and pollute the entire planet to have it.

Makes me crazy.

[ginnyinWI]

9. Kennedy's plan solves some of this:

I don't know anything about "jobs Americans won't do", but with Kennedy's plan, when the illegals come forward and get legal working papers, they also get wage and work benefits the same as citizens. This is better for everybody, because there won't be jobs filled with slave wages and conditions. They can even join unions. It will be up to employers to pay more and improve conditions if they want any workers at all.
As far as "taking American jobs away", there aren't a finite number of jobs--they grow in number. Our economy is growing too fast to make do with only the 5,000 immigrants a year that are currently allowed. It needs 400,000, says Kennedy, and he'd make that cap flexible to meet market needs. People are coming here for various reasons, but they couldn't do it if the jobs weren't here for them. This will make it legal and keep the employers responsible and accountable. I don't believe it will hurt them to pay higher wages--they make big profits.

Kennedy's plan solves so many of the problems brought by illegal workers because he makes room for them to be legal workers. This works for them and works for the employers. They will be paid like American workers, so the playing field will be even. If they "take away" a job from an American, it will be because they work harder or better, not because they will be working for less. The worker wins and the employer gets his employees (and takes responsibility to give them decent working conditions) Kennedy's plan has been approved by a bunch of groups including the SEIU.

It's no fun being an illegal. They can't get on the ladder of success and have to keep working cheap cash jobs, always wondering if they're going to be kicked out and never being able to make definite plans. They have to be really motivated to stick it out. Having legal working papers will be so much better; they do want to follow the rules like everybody else.
The borders will be easier to handle because there won't be such a push to become an illegal if it's possible to enter and work legally. Many of them do want to become citizens, but I don't think it needs to be a requirement, as long as they have a clear criminal record. Some may find they don't like it here and want to return to their home countries. It doesn't make us less safe to have them not be citizens--a determined terrorist would just become a citizen if they had to.

Go to Teddy's website and read the bill: http://kennedy.senate.gov/index_high.html It's down on the left side, dated 3/27/06.

[MH1]

20. My problem with all of this

was expressed pretty well by Robert Reich on NPR's Morning Edition (yesterday I believe - audio is probably up at npr.org).

I confess I haven't finished reading any of these "plans"...they're long and detailed and I get started and just have to shake my head.

Why. Because I haven't heard that any of them really focus on streamlining enforcement of existing labor laws enforcement on the employers, that is. There are existing laws requiring minimum wages and benefits and safe working conditions. Why the heck can't we put the friggin' means in place to friggin' enforce these existing laws!!!! :grr: :grr: :grr:

If existing labor laws were enforced, a lot more Americans would "want" those jobs. Sure, there would still be situations where it would be reasonable to allow immigrants to take the job at a lower wage. Even though I don't want to see H1-Bs expanded, I am okay with the program on a limited basis. But oh btw the H1-B law has its own problems that need to be fixed, and I'm not hearing any common sense approach to that in these bills.

To be sure, Kennedy-McCain sounds a lot better than what Frist and the batshit insane caucus are proposing. But Kennedy-McCain is clearly a compromise to ward off Frist's insanity. And a compromise with the batshit insane is never going to end up being really good, imo.

But Kennedy-McCain has broad support of many groups that I generally respect, so I would definitely like to see it pass, as an improvement (albeit marginal) to the current situation and in lieu of Frist's horrible bill.

BUT - isn't Kennedy-McCain stalled, at least for now? Frist apparently said "F--- the Judiciary Committee, I'm the Majority Leader and we will debate MY bill...because batshit insanity is what we want for this country."

[ProSense]

22. To your last point about the debate, Kennedy's statement says it all

"Situation Room" also led with the U.N.'s statement on Iran. Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) was on to talk about immigration: "It's not going to be easy. Whenever you get the issues on immigration, it's highly volatile, like civil rights issues, but this is something that is in the immediate interest of our country and the long term interest of our nation" (CNN, 3/29).

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/03/hotline_after_d_3.html

No doubt this debate is complicated by the fact that opinions run from complete apathy to "batshit insanity."

[kerrygoddess]

10. About the jobs that American's won't take

I live about an hour from the a big corporate Agri-business area - Oxnard, Ca. Drive through an area like Oxnard and you will see them working in the fields. It's tantamount to slave labor, and honestly I don't know any American's who will take a job working in the fields. The wages are low, the live in horrible conditions. One amendment in the immigration bill is one from DiFi for agricultural workers.

Another job they do for cheap that American's tend to shy away from - they work as maids in the big hotels, they work as live in nannies so for as little as $150 a week for more than 8 hours a day, 5 days a week.

They do dirty, manual labor. In all the years i have lived in Los Angeles not one person has said to me I lost my job to an illegal immigrant. The majority are here because they make if they are lucky 50 cents a day in Mexico. Why? Because NAFTA has hurt the Mexican economy - that's one reason. Yes we are doing them a disservice by allowing big corporations like Agri-business to pay them slave wages.

Many of them have fake SS cards, by the way, so that they can work, so they do pay into the system, but can't claim any benefits. A lot of people don't know about that either.

I don't condone that this is happening, but I have talked to these people - my daughter goes to school with their kids, and I get why they are here and I also see a lot of hardworking people amongst them who want to be here because they believe in the American dream and they want to stay here and become Americans.

[sandnsea]

13. Other than field work

That is just not true. You and I have had that discussion before, hell you've told me yourself that illegals worked in the floral industry and did the clean-up and prep work that the floral arrangers used to do, consequently shops hire fewer skilled floral workers. I don't have a problem with immigration, but it's not true that US workers won't work as maids or nannies or roofers or factory workers or whatever. Repeating this line of garbage just makes it harder for US workers to fight for fair wages and benefits and results in business having an excuse to use these immigrants as slave labor. It's part of the problem.

And regardless, it's strategically a dumb thing to say because all it does is runs low-income voters to the Republicans. Voters who really do these jobs whether you want to believe it or not.

[kerrygoddess]

15. In the big cities

you can't find people to take the jobs as nannies, maids, etc as readily as in small towns. Honestly it's a different circumstance in a place like LA and the consensus here right now, is let them stay, give them the documentation, let them pay the fines, let them pay taxes. We have thousands of kids here, KIDS who's parents could get deported and some of those kids were born here. I think that sucks! Those kids are going to school, they are smart, hard working kids who want a better life.

Low income people in the cities get this and in the big cities are where the high unemployment is. People in L.A. are not crying that they are losing jobs to undocumented workers. 500,000 turned out in the streets of L.A. Saturday, they were not all illegal, they were not al Latino, they came from all walks of life. They get why they are - my kid get's why they are here. They want a better life - are we so wrapped up that we can't help others do better?

What's wrong with both the immigrants and everyone getting higher wages? If they stay and are legalized than that is more reason to up the minimum wage. I don't think Dems are going to lose on this. Republicans are the ones who are going to lose on this. It's the Dems who are trying to make this better - Kennedy to be exact. He's got support on this from both sides of the aisle - including mine.

[sandnsea]

16. Two different issues

I could really care less who works here, does not matter one bit to me. I'm all for everybody who works gettng a fair wage to meet all their living needs. I was ecstatic to see the rallies over the week-end and I certainly know they were not all illegal, I grew up in California, remember? That's not what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about the argument that there are jobs "Americans won't do". I've known people who have gone to cities to be nannies. http://www.heartlandnanny.com Lots of people. It is just a dumb argument for Democrats to make when trying to implement better laws for undocumented workers. We need to legalize them so unscrupulous business owners can't exploit them with low wages and unsafe conditions. Legalize them so they can have union representation and can file labor complaints with the state. These are the things that will stop wages from dropping. That's the argument Democrats should make.

Between insulting laborers and not clarifying the difference between the Bush revolving-door plan and the McCain-Kennedy Plan, we could end up in alot of trouble. People are tired of all the job losses and Democrats are just not talking about this stuff correctly. We're going to have alot of workers feeling sold out if somebody doesn't get a handle on the truth of McCain-Kennedy pretty soon.

[kerrygoddess]

17. To be clear

I moved here 16 yrs ago from a small town in MA and there were only small flower shops there. Yes, I said out here they hire lower paid immigrants and I was surprised. Totally different from what I was used to. I never had a problem getting a job here, there's a high demand for skilled designers in this city and I made more money here as a floral designer than I did in MA and the work was easier because I didn't have the clean up and the prep work. And remember this was not as much of an issue then as it is now. When ever I tell people about my first experiences here in the floral industry and my first contact with immigrants in jobs that I wouldn't have expected it's with the understanding that it mystified me at the time.

[sandnsea]

18. You also acknowledged

There were fewer skilled designers hired as a result of using the illegals, regardless of what you say now. As a reality, not a complaint. Illegal immigration has been an issue in California and the southwest as long as I can remember, it had previously been limited primarily to farm work. You did the prep work and clean-up and you would have done it in LA too, which goes directly to the argument of 'Americans won't do those jobs". You've done them, I've done them, almost everybody has done them at one point or other. I don't think you felt clean up and prep work was beneath you. I didn't feel maid work was beneath me. My daughter didn't feel nurse's aide work was beneath her. It's an offensive argument, that's all.

[kerrygoddess]

21. I think

perhaps I simply was not clear about it or what I was saying was misunderstood. The concept of hiring unskilled workers here in the floral industry, was something that I had not seen back in MA. Not all shops hire unskilled, mostly the larger shops and some only during peak seasons. There's a high demand here for skilled designers and has been since I first moved here - I never was without work in the industry. Having some workers do prep and clean up increases productivity for skilled designers.

I don't disagree that the argument might be offensive to some people, but I do see the validity of "jobs some here won't take" argument, in some ways. Particularly in the agri-industry. I think the entire agri-industry sucks actually. Driving through the corporate farms in Oxnard over Christmas vacation I was disgusted to see the conditions there. I think things need to change and what Kennedy is proposing and DiFi also will hopefully raise the standards and wages for these people.

[sandnsea]

23. Improved working condtions

Bringing people out of the shadows, enforcing the same wage and labor laws for all workers so nobody is undercut. That's the argument that should be made.

[ProSense]

19. Valid argument

The issue is one of jobs and wages. When meaningful paying jobs are plentiful no one pays much attention to the immigration issue. The type of work: sure there are Americans citizens (many foreign born too) who will take those jobs, but there are also a lot of Americans will not. As far as workers fighting for fair wages and benefits, Walmart is a good example. Americans take those jobs and those issues come up a lot as the company tries to skirt them. But Walmart is a prominent company. A lot of businesses in the service industry are not aligned in a way that makes for meaningful protest, which usually manifest as an association or advocacy group fight. Like Edwards' hotel industry push. We've seen a similar push by groups for the Restaurant industry.

Small entities (many in the services industry) that offer low wages, and are not bound to provide benefits, can hire employees on an hourly, project, part-time and temporary basis, are not attractive to Americans for long-term employment. People often focus on the large corporation aspect of this issue, when a lot of small businesses (who provide gardening, janitorial or other services) and individuals (who hire nannies, maids and other helpers) are culpable and Americans don't take those jobs.

So part of the problem is the jobs and wages issue, but the other part is the mentality of a lot of Americans, and that's a loaded and complicated issue.


JMO and it's complicated to explain, and early.

[kerrygoddess]

12. Some background reading

This is a decent article - it backs up a lot of what Kennedy has said about statistics on the illegals and it backs up what JK and others have said about the jobs they take.

America’s illegal immigrants: Who are they?
They are more likely than citizens to work, but less likely to have diplomas
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12053518/

[JI7]

14. it seems to be one of those things people repeat without really thinking

of it. it may be true in the sense that Americans wont do those jobs for such horrible pay. being citizens they can take legal action to demand better. so some will just hire illegals who fear deportation and something worse.

but we see there are Americans who do dangerous and hard work like working in mines. even with the dangers as we have seen recently.

i would like to talk to Kerry and others about this.

i just think if we had a President who really cared and understood these issues they could work with other world leaders to improve things worldwide for working people. Clinton could have, but i don't think he really understood the importance of some issues or didn't see all the sides.

[Mass]

24. My 2 cents on this issue/

I am not totally comfortable with the issue, because for me it is more intellectual than lived.

First, let say that I do not know anybody who is FOR illegal immigration (except for some corporations willing to do that to pay people less). This is a silly argument.

So the questions I see are three-fold:

1/ What do we with do with these people who are currently here illegally? Do we allow them to regularize their situation or do we throw them to the sea (or send them back in the desert)? :dilemma: . Do we look at the situation they are in or are we inflexible? These are real issues touching real people and it is sad that some people are not even ready to talk about it (I met some real freaks on GD concerning this issue). :banghead:

2/ Once this pb is solved, what do we do to avoid that the situation occur again? If nothing is done, it will happen again. We know what needs to be done: crackdown on people who hire illegal workers with really tough laws and help Mexico and other countries so that the situation becomes better there and that people are less tempted to go accross the border illegally.

3/ Have a real debate about immigration (legal that is). It may be where people differ. Personnally, I dont really care if people come here legally, work according to current labour laws, and live accordingly to the law, as long as this law allows people to live adequately. There is probably no jobs an American citizen would refuse to do if it is decently paid. The problem occurs when some of these jobs pay substandard wages or have substandard solutions. So what is the solution then? Is it not to make sure there are no jobs like that and that somebody working full time has a decent salary on which he can live?

I know others differ and there is room for a real debate on the last issue, but how can we have it if we continue to mix it with 1 and 2? :shrug:

I have no opinion of Kennedy-McCain bill because I have not read it. However, I freak out when I hear McCain saying that these people do jobs nobody wants. If these jobs had decent conditions, may be somebody would want them.

[sandnsea]

25. Labor exploitation is the bottom line

That's the real debate we should be having, whether it's illegals here or workers overseas. As long as corporations have such a huge pool of desperate people, we're always going to be fighting these wage and standard of living wars. But that's not the way Democrats are talking about it. It's not just McCain who has said jobs nobody wants to do. That's what I was really referring to in the OP, the way Democrats are "framing" this and how it's going to come back to bite us. We've got Hollywood and lawyers and yet we couldn't build a case to convince a two year old to eat a cupcake. It's damned depressing.

[Mass]

26. I agree.

[ProSense]

27. Consensus on Immigration Bill Elusive

On thing is clear, Frist is a kook.

Consensus on Immigration Bill Elusive
By SUZANNE GAMBOA, Associated Press Writer
Thu Mar 30, 11:27 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Should they stay or should they go, those 11 million illegal immigrants living in the United States?

Even senators who oppose providing a path to citizenship to illegal immigrants are willing to grant them temporary legal status as long as they register with the government, pay fines and eventually leave.

"Our first obligation is to bring them out of the shadows, make sure we know who they are, why they're here, make sure we have a name and some kind of identification for them," Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said in an interview with The Associated Press.

"Then there will be a period of time, whether it's three years or six years ... but they can continue to work here and at that point in time — that's where the debate is — do they have to go home or are they put on some sort of path to citizenship?" Frist said.

Snip...

Frist dodged the question of what to do about illegal immigrants in the country in the bill he introduced. But other bills that could be offered as amendments tackle that issue.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060330/ap_on_go_co/immigration

[sandnsea]

28. Nothing about new business regulations

Nothing about doubling border patrol. Nothing about labor standards. All I keep hearing is US business needs cheap labor, they just said it again on MSNBC. I just have to say it again, no wonder workers think Democrats and "moderate Republicans" have abandoned them.

[sandnsea]

29. Here's a great great piece

I think this hits just the right tone.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=789539&mesg_id=789539