Republican and Conservative political analysis and commentary

A year ago, in a speech from the Oval Office, President Bush said this:

I believe that illegal immigrants who have roots in our country and want to stay should have to pay a meaningful penalty for breaking the law, to pay their taxes, to learn English, and to work in a job for a number of years. People who meet these conditions should be able to apply for citizenship ...

The immigration reform bill, however, doesn't require illegals to pay their back taxes. The Bush administration asked Sen. Ted Kennedy to take that requirement out of the legislation. (See Mickey Kaus for the details and links.)

Which is just one example of how the Republican Party has blundered big-time politically speaking with this immigration reform bill. The Republican Party should stand for the rule of law, and for simple fair play. It should not stand for rewarding 12 million law-breakers by exempting them from yet another law. Legal Americans don't get exempted from paying back taxes.

I've never thought Tom Tancredo had much of a chance to win the GOP nomination, and I still don't, but this "compromise" immigration reform bill certainly boosts his chances. 

It boosts the chances of any Republican candidate who takes a hardline position on illegal immigration...

A story from Agence France Presse notes that President Bush is "facing an open revolt on the Republican Party's right flank that has staunchly supported him on Iraq and now feels betrayed by the White House."

"It's a big government fantasy with no hope of becoming reality," said Newt Gingrich, a former Republican speaker of the House of Representatives who is now mulling a 2008 White House run, commenting Friday on the reform proposal.

Republican Representative Tom Tancredo called the immigration plan "a slap in the face" of hard-working Americans.

"The president is so desperate for a legacy and a domestic policy win that he is willing to sell out the American people and our national security," Tancredo said.

A story in the Monday Washington Post looks at criticism of the proposal from both supporters and opponents of illegal immigration.

[C]ondemnations from supporters and opponents of illegal immigration were a sign that the bipartisan compromise, like the illegal immigrants it addresses, faces a rocky future. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), a staunch opponent of illegal immigration, believes that the proposal's path to legal status is an amnesty that rewards lawbreakers.

Tancredo favors strengthening the Mexican border and, in the U.S. interior, cracking down so hard on illegal immigration at the workplace and in other areas that illegal immigrants would depart voluntarily.

As far as the advocates are concerned, the creation of a path, albeit an arduous one, to legal status for illegal immigrants is the deal's only high note. It is "responsive to the immigration movement's demand for a legalization program for the undocumented," said Deepak Bhargava, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Community Change, which helped to organize and bankroll last year's huge immigrant marches.

The notion that illegal immigrants have a "movement" that makes political "demands" is offensive to millions of Americans, who are equally revolted by the sight of their President and Congress caving in to such demands.