USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]Bush revives bid to legalize illegal aliens

By Bill Sammon

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

President Bush yesterday moved aggressively to resurrect his plan to relax rules against illegal immigration, a move bound to anger conservatives just days after they helped re-elect him.

The president met privately in the Oval Office with Sen. John McCain to discuss jump-starting a stalled White House initiative that would grant legal status to millions of immigrants who broke the law to enter the United States.

The Arizona Republican is one of the Senate's most outspoken supporters of expanding guest-worker programs and has introduced his own bill to offer a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

"We are formulating plans for the legislative agenda for next year," said White House political strategist Karl Rove. "And immigration will be on that agenda."

He added: "The president had a meeting this morning to discuss with a significant member of the Senate the prospect of immigration reform. And he's going to make it an important item."

While the president was huddling with Mr. McCain, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was pushing the plan during a visit to Mexico City.

"The president remains committed to comprehensive immigration reform as a high priority in his second term," he told a meeting of the U.S.-Mexico Binational Commission. "We will work closely with our Congress to achieve this goal."

But key opponents in Congress said Mr. Bush's proposal isn't going anywhere.

"An amnesty by any other name is still an amnesty, regardless of what the White House wants to call it," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican and chairman of the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus.

"Their amnesty plan was dead on arrival when they sent it to the Congress in January, and if they send the same pig with lipstick back to Congress next January, it will suffer the same fate," he said.

With the House and Senate already clashing over border security and deportation provisions in the pending intelligence overhaul bill, some Capitol Hill aides said it's almost impossible that Congress could agree on a broader immigration proposal.

Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), said he "suddenly went from calm to stressed out" after learning of the president's renewed push for immigration relaxation.

He predicted the plan would continue to meet vigorous opposition from House Republicans.

"If the House wouldn't deliver this bill before the guy's election, when he claimed he needed it for the Hispanic vote, why would they deliver it after the election, when their constituents overwhelmingly oppose it?" he said. "Why would House leaders follow the president over a cliff?"

White House officials insisted the move was not "payback" to Hispanic voters who supported Mr. Bush in greater numbers last week than in 2000. Although the president first proposed relaxing immigration shortly after taking office, he mothballed the idea after September 11, 2001, and downplayed it on the campaign trail.

"The president has long believed that reforming our immigration system is a high priority," White House deputy press secretary Claire Buchan said yesterday.

Mr. Stein said Mr. Bush is already a "lame duck president" whose proposal "has no credibility." He expressed astonishment that the president resurrected the plan before pushing other second-term agenda items, like tax simplification or Social Security privatization.

"There's a sense of obstinacy in the face of overwhelming evidence that it's a losing approach," he said. "I mean, the definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing, expecting a different result."

Though most members of Congress agree on the need for a guest-worker program to fill unwanted jobs, House Republican leaders, including Majority Leader Tom DeLay, Texas Republican, have panned other parts of the president's proposal as an amnesty.

Mr. Bush has not sent immigration legislation to Congress, though seven bills have been introduced by members of the House and Senate, according to Numbers USA, an organization that lobbies for stricter immigration controls.

They range from a proposal to give legal status to fewer than 1 million agricultural workers to a bill that could legalize most of the estimated 10 million illegal immigrants currently living in the United States. But none of the bills has passed even one chamber.

Mr. McCain is sponsoring a bill, along with Reps. Jim Kolbe and Jeff Flake, both Arizona Republicans, that would go further than the president's principles by explicitly allowing those now here illegally to enter a guest-worker program and eventually apply for permanent residence.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the president wants to "provide a more humane treatment" of illegal aliens from Mexico.

"America has always been a welcoming society, and this is a program that will match willing workers with willing employers," he said. "It will promote compassion for workers who right now have no protection."

He added of Mr. Bush: "It's something that he intends to work with members on to get moving again in the second term. It's something he believes very strongly in."

Mr. Powell yesterday insisted that security is an important part of his boss's proposal.

"We must also be innovative in our efforts to stop those who abuse the openness of our societies along the border, who would use this openness to harm our citizens through trafficking in drugs, or trafficking in human beings, or by committing acts of terrorism," Mr. Powell said.

Some on Capitol Hill said Mr. Bush may be emboldened by the fact that he didn't appear to lose support among conservatives in this year's election, and several Republicans who did support guest-worker programs defeated primary challengers, including Mr. Flake, Mr. Kolbe and Rep. Christopher B. Cannon, Utah Republican.

"I think a lot of members around the country saw those results and realized that voters are more interested in a serious solution to this problem," said Mr. Flake's spokesman, Matthew Specht. "So I think that certainly improves the chances for reform next year."

In a 90-minute interview Sept. 22 with editors and reporters of The Washington Times, Mr. Rove said a Bush victory would "be an opportunity" for the president's guest-worker proposal for immigrants, although he declined to call it a "mandate," as he did on such issues as Social Security reform and tax cuts.

Link

I believe for the most part I actually agree with this initiative. Exploitation of illegal workers is a large problem, and perpatrated by some of the largest companies (like Wal-Mart). Conservatives continue to fight it, being completely against amnesty, but they still can't get a handle on immigration and have no real solution to the problem.

Quote[/b] ] At the risk of assuaging your ego, I'll give you that one.

You'd be surprised to know I actually have very little ego.

[ralphwiggum 6]

I believe for the most part I actually agree with this initiative. Exploitation of illegal workers is a large problem, and perpatrated by some of the largest companies (like Wal-Mart). Conservatives continue to fight it, being completely against amnesty, but they still can't get a handle on immigration and have no real solution to the problem.

nice to know that GOP is finally trying to get their hands on the issue instead of ignoring it. however, we are talking about same GOP where illegal immigrants are considered to be a problem, not an issue. and is it me or is it a precursor to allow constitutional amendment to allow legal immigrants to run for presidency, say for example, Arnold?

Quote[/b] ]You'd be surprised to know I actually have very little ego.

yeah. you are married.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON — The White House has put out word daily of calls flooding in from around the world to congratulate President Bush (search) on his re-election victory. But somehow, Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero (search) just hasn't been able to get his call past the switchboard.

Zapatero phoned Bush not long after his Nov. 2 win, but wasn't put through to the president. Now, more than a week after the voting, the two leaders still have not hooked up.

The White House explanation signaled something of a cold shoulder toward the Spanish leader, who angered the administration by withdrawing troops from Iraq just after taking office in April.

"I think that may be the case, that he has tried to reach

Meanwhile, Bush met privately on Tuesday at the White House with Spain's former prime minister, Jose Maria Aznar (search), who was a chief Bush ally in the war in Iraq.

lol, what a kindergarden the white house has turned into. This president realy is from Texas.

[brgnorway 0]

[

I agree with you, but what really caught my attention is this:

Quote[/b] ]Meanwhile, Bush met privately on Tuesday at the White House with Spain's former prime minister, Jose Maria Aznar (search), who was a chief Bush ally in the war in Iraq.

I know it's not illegal in any way, but isn't there supposed to be a kind of restraint on contact like that unless you are head of a parlamentarian committee or something?

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I doubt that there is a "law" for it. But it definetly is a very sad faux pas and I think it is especially rude to do it deliberately. I guess there is no need to stress why this is butcher-diplomacy.

Helmut Kohl often met with Gorbatchow after Jelzin came to power. He met with Miterand after Chirac won the election. I doubt that there is a rule not allow such meetings as long as they are privately held.

[Bernadotte 0]

 www.fuckthesouth.com  

WARNING:  Contains some very strong language.

[Acecombat 0]

HTTP 403 error?

[The Frenchman 0]

 www.fuckthesouth.com  

WARNING:  Contains some very strong language.

Quote[/b] ]And the next time Florida gets hit by a hurricane you can come crying to us if you want to, but you're the ones who built on a fu***ng swamp. "Let the Spanish keep it, it’s a sh**hole," we said, but you had to have your fuc***g orange juice.

Rofl!

[Akira 0]

Thanks Janet

Quote[/b] ]Many TV stations cancel 'Saving Private Ryan' over fear of FCC sanctions

By LEON DROUIN KEITH

Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK - Many ABC affiliates around the country have announced that they won't take part in the network's Veterans Day airing of "Saving Private Ryan," saying the acclaimed film's violence and language could draw sanctions from the Federal Communications Commission.

The decisions mark a twist in the conflict over the aggressive stand the FCC has taken against obscenity and profanity since Janet Jackson flashed the world during the last Super Bowl halftime show.

Steven Spielberg's Oscar-winning movie aired on ABC with relatively little controversy in 2001 and 2002, but station owners _ including several in large markets _ are unnerved that airing it Thursday could bring federal punishment. The film includes a violent depiction of the D-Day invasion and profanity.

"It would clearly have been our preference to run the movie. We think it's a patriotic, artistic tribute to our fighting forces," Ray Cole, president of Citadel Communications, told AP Radio. The company owns WOI-TV in Des Moines, KCAU-TV in Sioux City and KLKN-TV in Lincoln, Neb.

Other stations choosing to replace the movie with other programming include Atlanta's WSB-TV, WFAA-TV of Dallas, WGNO-TV of New Orleans, WCPO-TV of Cincinnati, WSYX-TV of Columbus, WISN-TV of Milwaukee, WSOC-TV of Charlotte, N.C., WVEC-TV of WMUR-TV of Manchester, N.H., WHAS-TV of Louisville, Ky. and KVUE-TV of Austin, Texas. They are owned by a variety of companies, including Cox Television, Tribune Broadcasting Corp., Hearst-Argyle Television Inc., Belo Corp. and Sinclair Broadcast Group.

"We regret that the FCC, given its current timidity in dealing in this area, would not grant an advance waiver, which would have allowed stations like ours to run it without any question or any concern," Cole said.

In a statement on WSB-TV's Web site, the Atlanta station's vice president and general manager, Greg Stone, cited a March ruling in which the FCC said an expletive uttered by rock star Bono during NBC's live airing of the 2003 Golden Globe Awards was both indecent and profane.

The agency made it clear then that virtually any use of the F-word _ which is used repeatedly in "Saving Private Ryan" _ was inappropriate for over-the-air radio and television.

The Bono case "reversed years of prior policy that the context of language matters," Stone said. He added that broadcasters could not get any clarification from the FCC on whether the movie violates the standard.

ABC, which broadcast the film uncut in 2001 and 2002, issued a statement saying it is proud to broadcast it again. The network's contract with director Spielberg stipulates that the film cannot be edited.

"As in the past, this broadcast will contain appropriate and clear advisories and parental guidelines," the statement said.

Several stations said ABC had rejected their requests to air the movie after 10 p.m.

An FCC spokeswoman said Wednesday that the agency does not monitor television broadcasts, but responds to complaints. The agency received a complaint after the 2001 broadcast of "Saving Private Ryan," but it was denied, she said.

WSOC-TV of Charlotte said it received complaints about language in the movie when it aired in 2001 and 2002.

"Now, after much concern and discussion about family viewing over past months, and with Americans at war across the world, it is the vivid depiction of violence combined with graphic language proposed to begin airing at 8 p.m. that has forced our decision," said Lee Armstrong, the station's vice president and general manager.

ABC has told its affiliates it would cover any fines, but Cole, of Citadel, said the network could not protect its affiliates against other FCC sanctions.

The FCC has stepped up enforcement of its decency standards for certain content following this year's Super Bowl halftime show, in which one of Janet Jackson's breasts was exposed.

Profane speech, which is barred from broadcast radio and television between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., is defined by the FCC as language that is "so grossly offensive to members of the public who actually hear it as to amount to a nuisance," or epithets that tend "to provoke violent resentment."

The guidelines say the context in which such material appears is of critical importance.

Cole cited recent FCC actions and last week's re-election of President Bush as reasons for replacing "Saving Private Ryan" on Thursday with a music program and the TV movie "Return to Mayberry."

"We're just coming off an election where moral issues were cited as a reason by people voting one way or another and, in my opinion, the commissioners are fearful of the new Congress," Cole said.

This is totally ridiculous! If memory serves me right, ABC aired Schindler's List uncut with limited interuptions and no fines were levied. This seems by far more of an industry protest against the FCC then being truly worried about levied fines.

[EiZei 0]

Could someone enlighten me, is this because of some kinda-unconstitutional law or is FCC acting asshole for the hell of it?

[The Frenchman 0]

That whole Janet thing is full of shit. I hate the FCC, and so do others:

For example...

[Akira 0]

I think it is the stations that are refusing to show the movie that are the asses here. They have shown it two previous years before, uncut. No fines have been levied for this movie or Schindler's List or similiar. The stations played it all wrong. They should have shown the movie, just like they have before, and had the FCC decided to levied fines for it, it would have been the FCC that would have recieved the public's outrage. Instead they pre-emptiely refuse to show the movie, thus the public is rightly pissed at the stations now.

[sputnik monroe 102]

The FCC hasn't done anything in this case. This is simply a few cry baby stations protesting. Basically they are saying, "If we can't show titties and say fuck on sporting and award shows with out getting fined then we aren't showing Saving Private Ryan."

As if low brow garbage like the grammies and superbowl are in the same category of art as Saving Private Ryan. It's just common sense for christ sake. There's an obvious difference between some spoiled pop star saying fuck or flashing their tits and an actor saying fuck as part of a script to a artistic movie about world war II.

It's stuff like this that makes me hate every one.

[Akira 0]

Indeed.

My friend who works at the NBC affiliate here says they are even getting emails from pissed off people, ranting about the ABC station.

My station in Austin is one of those listed as not showing it, but the local news just ended with "See you after the movie." I'll have to see at 7 what movie that is.

Perhaps now with the attack on Falluja, people SHOULD see what war is like. Maybe that will cut through cheap slogans, and make people think one way or another about what is happening, whichever side they decide to take. It's the next best thing to making people visit the frontline I suppose.

[Akira 0]

So...At 7 o Clock teh Director of KVUE came on and said basically they wouldn't be showing Saving Private Ryan. Despite the fact they showed it TWICE before in primetime, she stated that they thought it was inappropriate to show a movie with such violence at a time when children would be watching, completely cutting the PARENTS out of their responsibilities. Thanks KVUE. They stated that they asked ABC if they could show it at 9, but were refused (again...they showed it TWICE before at 7).

So instead they choose to celebrate Veteran's Day not by showing an older movie ut with...

OPRAH.

They are showing fucking Oprah shows.Nothing says "Thanks" to the troops like fucking Oprah.

Fucking morons.

See ya. I'm going to go cue my DVD up.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

That's disgraceful

[billybob2002 0]

My ABC affiliate (Washington D.C.) is showing Ryan unedited right now....FUCK...

[sputnik monroe 102]

Quote[/b] ]Nothing says "Thanks" to the troops like fucking Oprah

Ewwwww! That's a horrible visual.

sorry not trying to be the grammar police, it just reads funny I'm sorry

[ozanzac 0]

I couldn't stand living with the American FCC...

ROFL @ fuckthesouth.com !

Gonna be forwarding that site to freinds.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]Nothing says "Thanks" to the troops like fucking Oprah

    Ewwwww! That's a horrible visual.

Nasty!

[ralphwiggum 6]

for your anger towards Oprah, you are PRed for 24hours Akira.

[joltan 0]

Wouldn't replacing 'Private Ryan' with a good piece of documentary being a better way of remembrance? PR is just a shitty piece of holywood propaganda anyways.

[shinRaiden 0]

Hey, we here in Washington State still don't have a Governer yet after the elections. Dino Rossi ® has come from -18000 votes down a week ago to +3586 as of yesterday, ~2000 automatically triggers a recount.

[kerosene 0]

I'm with the T.V stations - history should be sanitised, no one in the 40's or 50's swore or had pre-marital sex and I resent the implication that they did.

[sputnik monroe 102]

Here in Virginia they showed Phenomenon instead. ABC is pathetic.