To cross the Rubicon means to take an irrevocable step that commits one to a specific course. When Caesar was about to cross he quoted from a play by Menander to say "let the die be cast."
The Rubicon was a stream separating Cisalpine Gaul from Italy. When Julius Caesar led his troops from Gaul to the Rubicon, Caesar paused on the northern end of a bridge debating whether to cross or not. It would be a crime against Rome for proconsul Caesar to bring his troops in from the province, but if he didn't, he would be stripped of command and prosecuted. Although he hesitated, Caesar did cross the Rubicon (although we are not sure exactly where), in January 49 B.C., thereby starting a civil war.
Thanks to the strong support of Sen. Rubio, whom I gave the benefit of the doubt to as being naive and snookered, before I realized he was one of them that gives more benefits to illegals than citizens, S. 744 seemed destined to pass in the Senate, especially after it voted overwhelmingly to break it's own rules on Continuing Resolution 21 which included Pay Go which Senator Vitter (R-LA) adroitly pointed out, from http://washingtonexaminer.com/for-immigration-bill-senate-passes-motion-to-waive-all-applicable-budgetary-discipline/article/2532451:
So on Wednesday Republican Sen. David Vitter, a critic of the reform bill, raised a point of order objection against going forward with the Gang of Eight bill. It would increase the on-budget deficit, Vitter argued, violating Continuing Resolution 21.
What to do? The CBO report said in black-and-white that the bill will increase the on-budget deficit. And at the very least, raising the point of order was a way of highlighting the fact that any deficit reduction from the bill in the coming decade will come from those Social Security taxes from new taxpayers who will only later collect benefits. It didn't look good. So what should the Senate do?
The bill’s supporters responded quickly, proposing a “Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline” that would allow the Senate to ignore its own continuing resolution. The motion required a supermajority to pass, and it easily got it, passing on a vote of 68 to 30. (Two senators, Republicans Roy Blunt and Mike Lee, didn't vote, although they would likely have been against it.)
This is shades of O'care to get it passed in a hurry, via bait and switch tactics and break all normal rules of Senate decorum. Oh sure, most of the Gangsters said they welcomed more stringent border enforcement by letting amendments be heard and debated. But alas, Reid promptly cut off debate on many great amendments since the Gangsters really didn't want any amendments until, sound the horns, the Corker-Hoeven amendment miraculously appeared out of thin air to fix the "strongest enforcement border security ever" that we were promised by Sen. Rubio in the first bill he continues to advertise. So they had to replace the bill with the newest promise of the "strongest enforcement border security ever" at a very hefty cost...but we don't really know the cost and never will.
Not to worry, Sen. Rubio is hopeful that the House will make a bad bill better. Better yet, he and the other Gangsters are hopeful that Speaker Boehner will cave to their will and pass it as is. Many of us are holding our breath that the Speaker will hold to the Hastert rule but have had to exhale three times lately already. He can't be trusted so we must let him know our thoughts on this bill and his likelihood of holding onto his job if he breaks the rule and hearts of many in his caucus.
Our esteemed Front Page Writers and diarists have done an excellent job of detailing the horrors of this bill and its consequences. I've been trying to do my part and made a connection to the NSA scooping up our records to immigration in this diary, "11 Million Who? Connecting Immigration Reform to Big Government Eyes", where I said:
To the point of my title, if this secret program of tracking our caller id is meant to keep us safe, why is granting a pathway towards citizenship of 11 million unknown people wise? If the government believes it's necessary to track innocent USA citizens, why on this green earth would it be OK to grant a pathway to citizenship without first knowing who they are and why they are here? I find this anomaly very disturbing and hope others do too based upon all the recent examples of government abuse.
Step one on any immigration reform must be an honest answer to who and why someone is lurking in our country; then the border security and then reform laws. Give illegals a 90 day coming out party, determine if they should stay or go, give them a "you can stay for now" id card, and then we can seriously consider an immigration bill. If they don't declare being present in the 90 days and are subsequently caught, deport them immediately, no questions asked (or endless court proceedings).
I am all for legal immigration. I want folks to come in our front door rather than sneak in the back door. We don't know who is sneaking in and who is lurking and this bill doesn't stop sneakers or lurkers.
This bill puts illegals in a better situation than us...We the People. That's just wrong. Businesses with less than 50 employees are incentivized to hire an illegal to avoid the costs of O'care so they will hire an LPR over an American. And anyone here on a Visa is still at the end of the line after coming and going in order to follow the law of the land but yet law breakers are given preferential status.
This bill is a farce of Big Labor, Big Commerce, Big Union and Big LaRaza...pretty much everyone has been consulted except We the People. Why is that? With the exception of a few proud wack-o birds like Cruz, Lee, Paul and the 29 other Senators that voted against S. 744, most are either too dumb realize it will be their demise thinking they "must do it for future Hispanic votes", or they are in on the ploy to grow government and their power at all costs. They are comfortable with their elite status and don't want to upset the apple cart that many Americans want to kick over to prevent mass amnesty. They will learn that they can't have their apples and eat them too.
I challenge all politicians via pollsters to posit this simple question to as many illegals as they can find (without giving out their identity): Do you want to become a United States citizen? Followed by why yes and why no? And if yes, are you willing to give up your citizenship and vow your allegiance to America (this used to be a requirement of citizenship but no longer)? To steal from Rush, "trust me on this" that many here do not want to become citizens for various reasons such as:
- No, my allegiance lies elsewhere but I just want to make money here to send home and then go back home.
- He!! No! You people stole our Mexican land that's rightfully ours so you should give our land back...spittin' rage (and yes I've heard this on the radio and documented here a while ago).
- No, I can work under the table and I'd have to pay more taxes if I'm a legal citizen so I make more now.
- Yes and no since my conditions are worse at home so staying here is better but someday I hope to go back.
So before we get too generous with legal status, for our country's sake, take a break and find out who wants to stay and who wants to go if that's their only option unless they pledge allegiance to our flag. The so-called 11M, which I think is much higher, could be half of that if our lawmakers take the time to learn their agenda or plight in other cases.
This is why I hope the House via the Judiciary Committee under Rep. Goodlatte is appreciated by the leaders wherein we take baby steps and pass sound bills that help our legal immigration, shore up our borders, verify who is here first (yet I haven't heard anyone else talk about this important caveat), fix the entry/exit system and prevent illegals from working via E-verify before sending an open invitation to all here illegally without expecting an R.S.V.P.
Commonsense must prevail lest we find ourselves back in bell-bottoms from the 1980's situation! Find out who is here first, then let's talk and make a plan to treat all those here fairly that want to play by our Rules of Law and who yearn to become an American citizen. I'm all for Guest Immigrant status for those that don't want to become a citizen as long as they want to stay and play by our Rules and never become citizens with the right to vote. That to me is a fair plan: help those that want to become citizens and help Guest Immigrant Workers stay legally without a path to citizenship as long as they pay taxes and don't get subsidies via government programs. Pay-Go for Guest Immigrants on their dime, not ours!
We need to determine the root cause of the failure of upholding our existing laws to prevent illegal immigration, before we pile on more worthless laws that inevitably won't be upheld by this administration. I'm for reform but not a ambiguous omnibus bill, written by special interest groups, that grants a path to citizenship until we get a new administration that can be trusted to uphold existing laws.
“The death of democracy is not likely to be an assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment” by Robert Hutchins.
As usual, I'd be remiss not to include this famous speech for those of you who haven't yet read it yet by a former Democratic governor from Colorado, Richard Lamm, called “I Have a Plan to Destroy America. Please read the speech if nothing else and pass it along.
I know I'm not alone when I beg the House from crossing the Rubicon with this bill that will irrevocably change the fabric our great Nation. God Bless America and The Republic... if we can keep it.