Senator Patrick Leahy: "`Tis a great day for the Immigration Enthusiast!"Displaying her characteristic lack of integrity, Janet Napolitano seized the Boston/Chechnyan demonstration of the benefits of immigration from non-traditional sources to dodge today’s Senate Immigration Bill hearings. Reports that she is currently suiting up to lead a SWAT team against the survivor are probably exaggerated. (Delegation is not apparently one of her executive skills.)The Democrats happily proceeded with the hearings, no doubt delighted at the inevitable news blackout.However The Hill has produced Sen. Leahy faults bipartisan immigration bill as not `up to our values` By Alexander Bolton 4/19/13. This demonstrates that the Democrats intend to go full Treason Lobby on this legislation
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy (D-Vt.) on Friday criticized a bipartisan immigration bill introduced this week as failing to “live up to our values.”Leady faulted the 844-page bill, negotiated by four Democratic and four Republican senators, for spending billions on border security and requiring illegal immigrants to wait for at least a decade to win permanent legal status.This is important because as Daniel Horowitz has pointed out, the Bill is really enabling legislation by which any Administration can ignore the ostensible provisions and run immigration policy by decree and Executive fiat (as the Obamacrats are already doing). Intentions are the only guide which count.Leahy’s intentions are clear
"I cannot help but question whether spending billions more on a fence between the United States and Mexico is really the best use of taxpayer dollars,” Leahy said at a Friday hearing on the bipartisan bill.Leahy praised the bill for addressing backlogs of immigrants applying for family- and employer-sponsored visas, putting illegal immigrants who came to the country as children on a faster track to legal status...We have been calling this atrocity the Amnesty/Immigration Acceleration Bill. Perhaps the Open Borders/American Replacement Bill would more appropriate.