My ‘act of love’ for America: opposing Jeb Bush

There sure is a pile jumping on former Florida Governor Jeb Bush for his recent statement concerning illegal immigration. Bush is on tape saying that crossing the border illegally is an “act of love.” To be fair, he said many things before and after those words but the basic argument boiled down to a need of amnesty in some form. Here is a good portion of Jeb Bush’s comments so you can see the answer in context.

“I’m going to say this and it will be on tape, and so be it. The way I look at this is someone who comes to our country because they couldn’t come legally, they come to our country because their family’s dad who loves their children was worried that their children didn’t have food on the table, and they wanted to make sure their family was intact. And they crossed the border because they had no other means to work to be able to provide for their family. Yes, they broke the law, but it’s not a felony. it’s kind of — it’s a — it’s an act of love. It’s an act of commitment to your family. I honestly think that’s a different kind of crime that should be, there should be a price paid, but it shouldn’t be — it shouldn’t rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families. And the idea that we’re not going to fix this but with with comprehensive reform ends up trapping these people, when they could make a great contribution for their own their families but also for us.”

I’m not sure where to begin with this loaded answer filled with emotion and loftiness but lacking in practicality and basic math. I can empathize with families who feel like America is the land of opportunity that will lift them into a better life. Immigrants come to this country from all nations, most of which are in dire straights when it comes to opportunity, freedom and economic growth. It isn’t that I can’t appreciate the plight of many people in this world yearning for a better life. Furthermore, at least Jeb Bush is being honest with his views on this subject.

However, back in the land of laws and budgets, America cannot afford this “act of love.”

What is so loving about putting health care facilities out of business because they can’t afford to keep treating illegal immigrants? What good is it to come to America if there are no hospitals in border states to treat you?

What is so loving about overcrowding schools with children who cannot speak English and thus, make the entire class learn at a lower and slower pace? It isn’t because they’re not smart, but rather because they’re not able to learn at the same rate as the other English-speaking students. We’re not doing our children any favors by churning out students educated at a lower level so that the non-English-speaking students can stay caught up with the class. No amount of money can fix this problem.

What is so loving about driving wages down for every American? Every time more low-skilled immigrants enter the country, they drive down the cost of labor for Americans in similar lines of work. It’s been documented over and over again that the worst possible affliction on the lower and middle class would be any form of amnesty or continued influx of unskilled, uneducated workers.

What is so loving about breaking budgets at every level of government to provide social welfare programs on the backs of working Americans? Why should tax-paying-Americans face tax increases and deficit spending to subsidize families who enter this country illegally? Many Americans, especially in the robust economy of President Obama, are already struggling to put food on their own table, let alone the tables of millions of immigrant families.

So please, Mr. Bush, explain to me how eroding our health care system, education system, labor market and social welfare system is an “act of love” we should be eager to accept? I think this issue needs to be continually hammered and discussed since it is becoming harder and harder to fight against this pro-amnesty march which has infiltrated the big government, progressive wings of both major parties.

If Republicans want to win in 2014 and 2016, by convincing Americans they have a superior economic vision, I suggest they put this issue to bed moving forward.

  • Bob

    “50% Say They Are Less Likely To Vote For Another Bush In The White House…….Rasmussen poll

    Does the republicans really need to start another presidential election 50% in the hole? Will the establishment wing give up their “Golden Boy”?

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2014/50_are_less_likely_to_vote_for_another_bush_in_the_white_house

  • Bob

    Below is an article entitled “Jeb Bush’s Inescapable Dynasty Problem” by Robert Schlesinger. In it he describes that even if Gov.Bush went against Sec.Of State Clinton in the 2016 election the dynasty question wouldn’t be negated because “all putative political dynasties are not qualitatively the same.”

    http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/2014/04/07/hillary-clinton-wouldnt-negate-jeb-bushs-2016-dynasty-problem

  • Bill Hedges

    bob’s link reads:

    “Fifty percent (50%) of Likely U.S. Voters said in a Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey last month that they are less likely to vote for Jeb Bush for president in 2016 because his father and brother have already served in the White House.”

    “Fourteen percent (14%) said the Bush family’s presidential legacy makes them more likely to vote for the former Florida governor. Thirty-four percent (34%) say it would have no impact on their voting decision. (To see survey question wording, click here.)”

    Important NOTATION__bob’s survey was of “likely voters” NOT just REPUBLICANS. My link of buma was survey among Democrats. Survey on Jeb
    by ONLY Republican MIGHT GIVE DIFFERENT RESULTS.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/april_2014/50_are_less_likely_to_vote_for_another_bush_in_the_white_house

    Check Rasmussen Reports on buma since he was elected. Goes UP & goes DOWN.

    Pertinent point of poll:

    “Fifty percent (50%)”… “less likely to vote for Jeb Bush for President in 2016” OVER 2 years out BEFORE ELECTION WITH “LIKELY VOTERS” not just Republicans.

    THAT’S not A DEFINITIVE CAUSE to send Jeb packing AWAY from running. Presidents have WON and loss WITH SUCH RECORDS. Example:

    “ARCHIVE”

    “Hillary Clinton Leaps Ahead In Latest Democratic Poll”

    October 03, 2007·

    “According to the Washington Post-ABC News survey, Clinton’s lead has expanded over the Illinois senator, and is now at 53 percent to 30 percent among Democrats and Democratic-leading independents surveyed between Sept. 28 through Sept. 30. Her support is up 12 points in just three weeks while Obama’s has fallen 7 points. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards ranked at 13 percent”

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/10/03/hillary-clinton-leaps-ahead-in-latest-democratic-poll/

    Polls are a LIVING BREATHING changing result.

    2014 to vote is breeding time for formation of voters opinions. Good thoughts of a candidate can GO BAD or good. Name recognition may be GOOD or BAD.
    ___

    buma in only 1 year turnaround poll WHILE Jeb has over 2 years.
    __

    Nate gives a fair assessment for Jeb then fairly concludes WE ARE “land of laws and budgets, America cannot afford this “act of love.”

    ANOTHER ((( given ))) CAN NOT get Greyhound bus tickets for MULTIPLE MILLIONS of illegals.

    “No más”

    1. To future illegals entering America AS BEST we can.

    2. Illegals BOOTED OUT that commit crimes.

    3. NO SOCIAL SERVICES or aid for illegals. CUT to the BARE BONE as humane can accept.

    5. NO reward for braking law.

    Such as schooling TO citizenship. Kids born in America by one parent or both illegal ARE NOT automatically or otherwise Americans.

    Restriction in Mexico are much hasher.
    __

    Bad karma OR good for possible Republican Presidential pick is a TOSS UP now and even in Republican Presidential debate. A momentary lapse in memory or hint of marital scandal can kill a UP & going bid for highest office AT ANY STAGE.
    __

    Jeb isn’t out, if he runs, until AFTER the 10 count…

  • Bill Hedges

    In bob’s latest comment, bob quotes his link:

    “all putative political dynasties are not qualitatively the same.”

    1. buma HAD NO “Dynasty” YET beat Hillary WHO DID.

    2. Teddie had a Camelot LONGER LIVED “Dynasty” but NEVER BECAME President. With brothers immortalized by way of Assassination.

    3. W. Bush had short term “Dynasty” as Hillary & WON.

    ON PAPER looking good for Jeb.

    For LONG TIME I commented on a leaning LIBERAL SITE. Leader of the pack was none other than Robert Schlesinger. A LIBERAL _a·fi·ci·o·na·do _…

  • Simple reply…Jeb is an elite! Belonging to the Republicrats and a Bill Clinton mold politician! Don’t be deceived, there is little !! DIFFERENCE between Bush & Clinton ! They ARE one worlders !!!

  • Bob

    While reading numerous articles concerning illegal immigrants and the response to Gov. Bush’s remarks I have come across the phrase “Many of the illegal immigrants that find themselves in our country…….”. My question is just HOW DID THESE PEOPLE “FIND THEMSELVES”IN OUR COUNTRY? It makes it sound like they were drugged,kidnapped and dragged across the border without their consent. In reality this is simply another tactic by the left media to trivialize that laws were broken.

    Personally I don’t believe Jeb Bush is going to run in 2016.During his recent comments he acknowledged that his remarks were being recorded and stated “So be it”. He may not have run for office in 7 years but he is politically astute enough to know not to say anything that will cause donors to think twice about giving or make a remark that will come back and bite you on the rump.

    • Bill Hedges

      bob wrote:

      1.”…My question is just HOW DID THESE PEOPLE “FIND THEMSELVES”IN OUR COUNTRY? It makes it sound like they were drugged,kidnapped and dragged across the border without their consent.”

      Forget “sound like” bob. Leave imagination OUT. Not even CLOSE or FUNNY.

      There is the obvious, they came here illegal as adults. THEN there are the children they brought, children born here in USA, and then there are expired visas.

      2. “In reality this is simply another tactic by the left media to trivialize that laws were broken”

      WHAT ???

      THIS IS Jeb speaking. NOT “left media”.

      You could say Jeb “trivialize …laws.. broken” if you wish. That would be, AT LEAST, a correct OPINION…

  • Bill Hedges

    bob wrote:

    “He may not have run for office in 7 years but he is politically astute enough to know not to say anything that will cause donors to think twice about giving or make a remark that will come back and bite you on the rump.”

    Will be zero in on bob’s:

    “… politically astute enough to know not to say anything that will cause donors to think twice ”

    Surprised bob you didn’t reach THAT CONCLUSION, NOT ON YOUR OWN necessarily, but when reading what Jeb himself said when honoring his Father.

    “Jeb Bush: Many illegal immigrants come out of an ‘act of love’”?

    April 6, 2014

    A few things that maybe Nate left out of his article OR not:

    1. Jeb said “A great country ought to know where those folks are and politely ask them to leave,” he said, adding later that properly targeting people who overstay visas “would restore people’s confidence” in the nation’s immigration system.”

    2. Will shorten this IS LONG:

    “There are means by which we can control our border better than we have. And there should be penalties for breaking the law,” he added. …– the dad who loved their children — was worried that their children didn’t have food on the table. …to provide for their family. Yes, they broke the law, but it’s not a felony. It’s an act of love. It’s an act of commitment to your family. I honestly think that that is a different kind of crime that there should be a price paid, but it shouldn’t rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families.”

    3. “… Even Bush seemed to acknowledge that his position could cause him political trouble as he mulls whether to run for president.”

    4. “In 2012, Texas Gov. Rick Perry drew criticism for defending a law allowing illegal immigrants in Texas to pay in-state tuition by suggesting that people opposed to the measure were insensitive.”

    “In 2012, Texas Gov. Rick Perry drew criticism for defending a law allowing illegal immigrants in Texas to pay in-state tuition by suggesting that people opposed to the measure were insensitive.”

    “Perry’s Republican opponents” gave Perry WHAT FOR, for saying this…

    I think Jeb was SPEAKING FROM THE HEART at a event to honor his Dad.

    He knew he was being controversial BUT STOOD TALL going “full speed ahead” for what he thought was RIGHT.

    5. “At the same event Sunday, Bush said he would make a decision by the end of this year about whether to run for president in 2016.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/04/06/jeb-bush-many-illegal-immigrants-come-out-of-an-act-of-love/

    There are numerous reasons why someone DOESN’T early on STATE they are running. They may wish to READ THE STARS a little, do they have a chance of inning against those that seek the same office ?

    I’ll quote another:

    Bob April 5, 2014 at 11:22 am

    “As I said earlier I have yet to see any candidates FROM EITHER PARTY that I feel has the “Gravitas” for the position. And as Sam said “It is far to early for us to get into details for or against any candidate”. To much can happen between now and then.”

    http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2014/04/do-republicans-need-a-woman-to-battle-hillary-clinton/#f8uQ86ulG3qOQVxc.99

    After Teddy’s death, our man that replaced him in a LONG STANDING LIBERAL SEAT, was against:

    1. Waterboarding

    2. bumcare

    Did you know, since I mention it OFTEN, Bill Clinton was in agreement with Newt, welfare needed REFORM. Not exactly a Democrat idea.
    ___

    bob has a term used OFTEN___ “RINO”…

    At what point does a politician CROSS THAT threshold ??? Is it a CERTAIN issue ???

    Perhaps bob feels Ronald Reagan IS A “RINO”:

    “Yep. Reagan did the A-word”

    “In 1986, Reagan signed an immigration reform bill, the first in 20 years, that legalized the status for 1.7-million people.”

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/jan/06/rudy-giuliani/yep-reagan-did-the-a-word/

  • Bill Hedges

    inning should be winning.

  • Bill Hedges

    “… quote the President gave in a 1984 debate”

    “I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally.”

    RONALD REAGAN

    http://www.cafeconlecherepublicans.com/what-did-ronald-reagan-think-about-immigration-amnesty/

    Reagan was well versed in politics. Even so, didn’t accept bob’s concept. NO double talk. He SAID WHAT HE MEANT. No matter the consequences.

    In my book, that’s NOT the actions of a “RINO”. Illegals is a American issue which needs to be addressed. Can’t deport MILLIONS. NOT without transforming our nation into something unrecognizable.

    Jeb-Ronald… “TWO peas in a pod” on this.

    Remark DID NOT “…come back and bite… the rump” IN Reagan case. Though this side of Reagan has been placed in a DON’T OPEN BOX. Similar to JFK’s:

    “It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now … Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.”

    – John F. Kennedy, Nov. 20, 1962, president’s news conference
    http://www.wnd.com/2004/07/25640/#qxDuuz4SqVcRKS8C.99

    On this issue, COULD SAY, JFK was a “DINO” ??? Rather say JFK saw tax cuts of 20’s, etc. WORKED INCREASED government revenue by stimulating the economy. Right is Right…

  • Bob

    Nate:

    Below you will find an article from “The Federalist” website by ben Domenech entitled “Obama Administration To Insurers: There Is No Such Thing As Illegal Immigrants”.These are the same people who say illegal aliens will come forward and pay their fine for illegal entry into the United States. Citizenship?……just another Obama exemption

    http://thefederalist.com/2014/04/10/obama-administration-to-insurers-theres-no-such-thing-as-illegal-immigrants/

  • Bill Hedges

    As I have quoted in other comments, boarder security & citizenship ARE sticking points to any agreement on this subject.

    The ransacking of Reagan’s amnesty law, negating whole purpose of law, has any NEW BILL surrounded by flashing lights, bells, & roped off with police CRIME SCENE tape.

    If read CAREFULLY Jeb has the two same concerns boarder security and Citizenship.(Father can take care of his family WITHOUT CITIZENSHIP). Jeb for STOP THE FLOW.

    Extremist exist. “The Federalist” and “wacho birds” are two. In wacho birds” world John McCain DOESN’T have a record of conservatism. The lipid test issues have some irreconcilable differences with tea. Though John was advised he was WELCOMED BACK if he _ re·neged _ on his stance on a few issue.

    In COLD LIGHT OF DAY, meeting needed conditions to even consider amnesty seriously, well, is easier to pass through a ‘eye of a needle’.

    Thank goodness for open forums, such as this place, to freely express oneself on all comments…

  • Bill Hedges

    Tea’s leading Presidential candidates lean MORE toward “The Federalist” THAN towards bob’s Tea Party mentality !!!???!!!

    EVERYBODY is a “RINO” !!!???!!! Not JUST McCain. More peas in John’s pod. All card carrying TEA “RINOS”. Maybe “TINOS” !!!???!!!:

    1. Rand
    2. Paul
    3. Rubio
    4. Cruz

    Who HOLDS TRUE to Tea ??? Tea needs more than a facelift after Cruz’s debt ceiling-buma debacle. (here it begins). Else kiss 2016 bye-bye Tea ??? Ask Tea Party HOPEFULS.

    “Rand Paul on immigration: Republicans have got to get beyond deportation”

    April, 1, 2014

    Jeb IN LINE with Tea’s favorite SONS.

    “Before anyone excommunicates him from the GOP on grounds of RINOism, ask yourself: Will there be a single Republican candidate onstage next year at the debates who challenges him on this point? Don’t say Cruz. Cruz opposes a path to citizenship but he’s in line with Paul, Rubio, etc, on legalization and work permits, which are the truly important provisions. Once legalization is granted, citizenship will inevitably follow. (That’s why it’s crucial to secure the border first, to make sure that this amnesty is the last amnesty.) If Paul’s candidacy is DOA for taking this line, I’m not sure whose candidacy is still alive.”

    http://hotair.com/archives/2014/04/01/rand-paul-on-immigration-republicans-have-got-to-get-beyond-deportation/

    “Cruz Tries to Claim the Middle Ground on Immigration”

    September 12, 2013

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/13/us/cruz-tries-to-claim-the-middle-ground-on-immigration.html?_r=0

  • Bill Hedges

    Nate

    You once said was not Tea fault Romney loss. I gave link that some followers of Ron Paul STAYED HOME.

    WHAT ABOUT bob supporting my view _ in·ad·vert·ent·ly _ ? bob SO OFTEN speaks as spokesman for the Tea masses. From Nate’s other site:

    bob House Republicans pushing immigration reform package January 31, 2014 at 2:39 pm

    “What we don’t know is what exactly does “specific enforcement triggers” mean? As we read the memo it’s basically indistinguishable from the Gang of 8 proposal.”

    “If you take away all the vowels in RNC Chairmen Reince Priebus name you are left with RNC/ PR /BS.”

    “Therefore if Reince Priebus feels that the only option to handle MSM like MSNBC is to BOYCOTT then he leaves the TEA PARTY RIGHT no other option but to BOYCOTT THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS IF THEY GO THRU WITH THIS IMMIGRATION REFORM.”

    bob purposing a/another “BOYCOTT” of election possibility !!

    That’s a “well informed” thoughtful behavior ? “BOYCOTT” elections !!! Second election of buma insured smoother sailing of bumcare.