Slashdot Mirror
Real-ID Passes U.S. Senate 100-0
jeffkjo1 writes "The U.S. Senate has passed the $82 billion Iraq Supplemental Spending Bill (approved by the House last week), which includes the Real ID act driver's license reform (previously reported here.) The National Governors Association has indicated at the possibility of a lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the Real ID provisions, which would create national driver's license standards, and a federal database of information from all 50 states."
Well, someone did throw a grenade at Bush in Georgia (Russia) recently... See here.
It fell to the ground unexploded, though.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Principled politician, Molly Naivitus (D-MA) then continutes on to vote against the Partial Birth Abortion Act and quietly wonders if there's any difference.
I'm going to make it a yearly trip to piss on his grave.
And when the officer pulls me over at the not-really-random checkpoints along the Interstate to ask me for my "papers please", I'll tell him I'm going to piss on the grave of the man who made it easy for him to look me up.
I cannot believe that even Russ Feingold (D-WI) didn't stand up to this (he was the sole voice voting against the PATRIOT Act)... But the Republicans are to blame here, as they control the majority, and it is a Republican who will sign it into law.
Principles? Fuck 'em. Republicans have never adhered to principle any longer than politically-convenient. Concern for Big Brother government and Soviet-style national ID systems? Whatever happened to worrying that we would become like the very communist and socialist states we were fighting against in the Cold War?
Free country, huh? Bullshit, not anymore.
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
The bill was not intended to allow slave labor to fence off the border, you're just being an idiot. If and when any of the horror of horrors in your doomsday agenda come true then you can come back and call me a moron, but it's not going to happen and you know it. The provisions you cite were intended to limit legal action by anti-American pro-illegal activists. You've been watching too much Star Wars if you think that just because some bill is passed, an evil dictator can come and instantly turn America from a Democracy into tyranny. The people would never go for that.
The fact is that the majority of Americans support Real-ID, just like every Senator and the vast majority of Congressmen. It isn't because we're misinformed, it's because we're sick of illegals pouring into our country.
That'd be relevant if the Majority leader, Bill Frist, didn't filibuster a Clinton nominee
This is a bald-faced lie the Democrats want you to beleive. All the failed Clinton appointees were killed in committee in manners in accordance with established Congressional rules.
George W. Bush is a conservative in the same way that Osama bin Laden, Adolf Hitler, and Joseph Stalin could be considered "conservative".
(1) religious "fundamentalist" == YES
(2) consolidation of power ======= YES
(3) neutralized the opposition === YES
(4) employed massive propaganda == YES
(5) military force for hegenomy == YES
However, the RealID Act was tacked onto the military spending bill by conservative GOP members of the House of Representatives in revolt against the wishes (and goals) of President Bush. George W. Bush favors aiding and abetting illegal immigration because of (a) personal reasons (like blackmail), (b) cheaper wage-slaves for his corporate interests, and (c) larger block of GOP voters (legal or not). When fully enacted, this law will put the cabosh on his amnesty plans, including his plan to further bankrupt SS by furnishing SS pensions to illegal aliens.
Most everyone on slashdot has been "pissing and moaning" about identity theft, slack enforcement, and minimal sentencing (compared to the impact on victims). The RealID Act goes a long way toward "patching the cracks" that makes identity theft so easy. One cannot help but wonder just how many "ardent" opponents of this legislation are actually in the USA illegally.
The number of illegal aliens in the USA has been estimated at up to about 28 million, although the "politically correct" (and government approved) number is more like 12 million. The government has little clue as to how many are here illegally, let alone just who, exactly, they might really be.
George W. Bush's idea of "sealing the borders" is to spend big money on sophisticated hardware instead of "boots on the ground". Counting illegal aliens crossing the borders is not, in any way shape or fashion, the same as interdicting them. And the woefully inadequate funding for US Border Patrol agents is only matched by the woefully inadequate funding for detention facilities. The INS has adopted a technique first used by eco-friendly sport fishermen, called "catch and release". Those illegal aliens caught simply disappear into the woodwork, never intending to show up for their immigration court hearings. The way these illegal aliens blend into American society is with the use of false documents, including SSNs and DLs.
The RealID Act might seem a bit draconian, until the context of a 28 million illegal alien invasion is factored into the post-9-11-2001 reality. What the government "should" be doing is rounding up all those illegal aliens, and deporting them (, instead of planning to grant a blanket amnesty).
Illegal aliens have already broken the law by entering this country illegally, and the use of fraudulent documentation breaks additional laws. Just how many laws should the US government allow to be broken before deciding that these people are criminals, should be punished, and then deported?
YOU read the second to last paragraph. And keep in mind this is in the opinion articles. The loaded language "under-the-radar procedural maneuvers" is not a comparison to a failure to vote on cloture in the full Senate. It is perfectly legit to kill nominations in committee and BOTH PARTIES have done it throughout time. I have no complaints about Democrats doing this in the past. Please US Constitution, Article 1, section 5: "Each House may determine the Rules of its proceedings"
At issue currently IS NOT ABOUT A COMITTEE PROCEDURE. That's the disconnect in logic in all the Democrat's arguments. You can't compare appointments killed in committee with refusal to vote on cloture in the full Senate. These two activities are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.
It must be fun to mod me down for pointing out the real facts of this SIMPLE AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND case for not taking the Democrat's crap at face value. GO ahead and burn your mod points; my karma is still "excellent".
Now we see your true colors, he hands you your ass and all you can do is try to deflect it with bullshit instead of a thought out response addressing his argument. This is exactly how spinsters argue every point they can't factually or even thoughtfully backup.
Piss off.
Cheers.
This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Comment removed based on user account deletion