Republican Senator-elect Cory Gardner of Colorado is a total moron

"I support immigration reform, making sure that we start where American people want to it start, border security. Build a strong smart guest worker program because that has to be part and parcel of border security. But to simply say no, I believe is unacceptable. Just to say no to everything is unacceptable. That's the message that American people sent on Tuesday night."

-- quoted here

Reminds me of the now-defunct Senator Scott Brown, lately of Massachusetts and not-so-lately of New Hampshire, who also said No to the Republican leadership shortly after taking Senator Ted Kennedy's seat in the US Senate. That worked out great, didn't it, Senator Elizabeth Warren?

Hm. Just what is it that it is acceptable to say No to, Mr. Gardner?

"You shall have no other gods before me?"

"You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth?"

"You shall not make wrongful use of the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not acquit anyone who misuses his name?"

"You shall not murder?"

"You shall not commit adultery?"

"You shall not steal?"

"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor?"

"You shall not covet your neighbor's house?"

"You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor?"

Americans elect 9 senators liberal on illegal immigration, but 14 for strong borders and against amnesty

Americans elected the following Republicans last night who are for strong border security and against amnesty for illegal aliens:

Sessions (AL), Cotton (AR), Perdue (GA), Risch (ID), Roberts (KS), McConnell (KY), Cochran (MS), Daines (MT), Tillis (NC-may be strong), Inhofe (OK), Lankford (OK), Scott (SC), Capito (WV) and Enzi (WY).

A grades from NumbersUSA: Sessions, Risch, Roberts, Lankford, Scott, Enzi

B grades: Cotton, McConnell, Cochran, Inhofe

C grades: Daines, Capito

no grade: Tillis

True reformer: Perdue

Larry Kudlow must be kidding: "if the 11 million illegals who live here obey the law . . ."

Here:

And if the 11 million illegals who live here obey the law, pay taxes, learn English, and understand the Constitution, they deserve legal status. Citizenship is an issue way down the road. And yes, we must include border security, where unfortunately Obama's lax policies have contributed to the calamitous surge in illegal-immigrant children. But temporary visas or work permits should be part of a sensible reform package. The E-Verify system can work.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Ahem . . . illegals have already broken the law, Larry. So sorry to see the amnesty fanatics have abandoned the first conservative instinct, the love for law and order. There will be no free-market without it.

Senator Rubio Fears Executive Orders Instead Of Fighting Them

He looks to his right, but to us it's left.

Sen. Rubio continues with his mission of disappointing the country and disappointing conservatives, here, expressly ceding his legislative authority to the executive:

“I have been saying now for over a year I believe that this president tempted, will be tempted, if nothing happens in Congress he will be tempted, to issue an executive order like he did for the DREAM Act kids a year ago, where he basically legalizes 11 million people by the sign of a pen,” Rubio said. ... “But we can’t leave it, in my mind, the way it is, because a year from now we could find ourselves with all 11 million people here legally through an executive order from the president, but no E-Verify, no border security, no more border agents — none of the other reforms that we desperately need.”

The (Loser) Republican Establishment Is Behind Immigration Amnesty, Not Conservatives

The newest ad campaign supporting the immigration amnesty bill from the US Senate is from American Action Network, according to the Chicago Tribune, here:

“This is the tough border security America needs,” said the television ad, the first to specifically target the House from American Action Network, whose Hispanic Leadership Network has sought to educate lawmakers about immigration. It notes that the surge is supported by conservative leaders, including what is essentially a who’s who of potential 2016 presidential contenders: Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the former vice presidential nominee. The ad will run nationally in prime time this week on the Fox News channel.

The founders of American Action Network are Fred Malek of Nixon administration Bureau of Labor Statistics "Jewish cabal" infamy and ex-Democrat Norm Coleman, who lost his US Senate seat to that formidable foe, Stuart Smalley. The sister organization to the Network is American Action Forum headed by Douglas Holtz-Eakin, of losing John McCain campaign fame. Evidently Messrs. Rubio, Bush and Ryan don't mind it one bit being mixed up with these retreads, but then again, Rep. Ryan knows all about hooking up with losers.

Malek managed the losing reelection campaign of Pres. George Herbert Walker Bush, and was co-chair of the John McCain presidential campaign finance committee. Oh yeah. In a civil fraud action brought by the SEC in 2003 Malek reportedly paid a personal fine of $100,000. Unlike President Obama, Malek has denied having any taste whatsoever for barbecued dog.

Sen. Marco "Rube Goldberg" Rubio Thinks Fines On Illegals Will Pay For Border Security

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

Quoted here:

“We need to register them as soon as possible, not just to keep the problem from getting worse, but we’re going to require them to pay a fine, and that’s the money that we are going to use to pay for the border security,” Rubio explained. “If we don’t get that fine money from the people that have violated our immigration laws, then the American taxpayer is going to have to pay for border security.”

Here's the most wildly optimistic estimate of total revenue from fees and fines on 11 million illegal aliens from The Christian Science Monitor: $2,000 per illegal over a decade. And good luck with that given all the work-arounds to fines and fees in the Senate bill. But, make the wild assumption you'll collect the full amount, and you get a paltry one time total of $22 billion.

The cost of security just on the Mexico border in 2012 was $11.7 billion according to BusinessWeek here. America is going to spend well north of $120 billion for border security over the next decade, and along comes Rubio telling us we need to flush the illegals out first before we secure the border in order to finance the security, otherwise the taxpayers will have to pay for it.

What a joke. We're going to pay for it anyway, big time.

In 2011 Republican Governor Rick Perry of Texas was quoted in The New York Times here saying a fence alone would cost $30 billion and a decade to build:

Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, claiming superior experience as the leader of the state with 1,200 miles of the border, advocated a more complex strategy, combining fencing and surveillance technology with “a lot of boots on the ground.” Mr. Perry said that building a border-length fence would take “10 to 15 years and $30 billion” and would not be cost-effective.

Whatever the answer is to illegal immigration, the Senate amnesty-first bill ain't it.

Adios Hombre: Republican Sen. Marco Rubio Should Join The Democrat Party

Adios, Hombre!

Because that's where he belongs with his now unconditional amnesty for illegal aliens:

"In most of his public appeals for the Gang of Eight bill, Rubio has stressed its enforcement provisions, saying that border security must come before immigrants are granted legal permanent resident status. What he has not stressed so much is the fact that the bill would legalize the 11 million almost immediately, after they have passed background checks and paid some sort of fine. That would happen before any new security measures are completed, or even begun."

George Bush: Mushy-Headed Liberal

George W. Bush has been beating his little isolationism, protectionism and nativism drum for years now, but it seems like conservatives such as Laura Ingraham are finally looking at it in the right way. She's even suggesting that if we knew in 2000 what we know today about George and his family (people should be free to marry anyone they love), maybe conservatives wouldn't have supported W back in the day.

I know I didn't. I admit it. I was one of the few, the proud, the (top!) 500,000 Americans who voted for Pat Buchanan in 2000. And I've still got the lawn sign to prove it! In 2004 I had to be drawn kicking and screaming to vote for Bush. The alternative was too horrible to contemplate (a man who won't stop for stop signs while behind the wheel of his Jeep is a dangerous man, willing to break any law), as it was also too horrible to contemplate in 2008, as events prove everyday.

Bush's continuing antagonism against, for example, advocates of border security doesn't surprise me, and Laura is right to perceive that his sort of Republican poses a threat to the policy initiatives championed by Tea Partyers and conservatives. Her show this morning is devoting considerable time to Bush's remarks at Southern Methodist University on January 24th.

But Bush was making similar remarks already in November 2010 in Britain as part of his book tour, and Pat Buchanan eviscerated him way back in March 2008 for the very same kind of loose and silly talk:

In smearing as nativists, protectionists and isolationists those who wish to stop the invasion, halt the export of factories and jobs to Asia, and stop the unnecessary wars, Bush is attacking the last true conservatives in his party.

Which is understandable. For after the judges and tax cuts, what is there about Bush that is conservative? His foreign policy is Wilsonian. His trade policy is pure FDR. His spending is LBJ all the way. His amnesty for illegals is Teddy Kennedy's policy.

The truth is George Bush hasn't changed, and has never been a conservative. Ever true to his self-described role as The Decider, he once boasted that he would be the one who decided what is Republican and what isn't:

"That conservative movement stuff is over. I've redefined the Republican party."

Even liberals have recognized Bush as one of their own. So Richard Cohen in The Washington Post in 2007, after cataloguing Bush's liberal intentions in No Child Left Behind, in affirmative action hires in his administration, and even in the Iraq war, he adds:

You only have to listen to Bush talk about the virtues of immigration -- another liberal sentiment -- or his frequent mention of the "soft bigotry of low expectations" to appreciate that the president is a sentimental softie, what was once dismissively called a "mushy-headed liberal."

Cohen leaves out Bush's greatest liberal achievement: Drugs for Seniors, the single largest expansion of federal government to that time since Lyndon Johnson. He leaves it out because that's what really drives liberals crazy, how George Bush out-liberaled the liberals, and co-opted them for eight years.

That's why they really hated him.