Thread: ACTION ALERT FROM W.....WARNING TO ALL ACTIVISTS!!

I've been listening too.

The last question for Rosemary:
"So, do you think they're [senators] feeling the heat over this?"
[Rosemary chuckles]..."Oh, I know they're feeling the heat over this."

The fact that Durbin hasn't introduced his amnedment says alot. He is probably tweeking it as we speak in order to get a vote or two.

Yeah, my read on it is basically the same.

I know that the senate is just really bogged down in party-line back-forth over the Iraq-related amendments, funding, etc. AND I think this is only the pet project of Durbin and his group - most senators I think would rather not revisit the issue about now.

Rosemary also said that the longer it drags out (as W here has said too), that the prospects for eventual passage decrease. So, drag senate drag - take your time...

A talking point I mostly use is:

"The Dream Act will encourage illegal alien families to smuggle their teenage children, and enroll them into our public highschools and after two years of taking Spanish and Painting 101 at a tax-payed comminity college, they will receive amnesty and soon sponsor that amnesty to their family. Therefore, I demand that Senator _________ votes NO on the Durbin Dream Amnesty Act!".

NumberUSA gave their name in order to avoid callers. Lindsey Grahamnesty is the most likely.

Is this guy dumber than a bag of rocks or what?

I remember the "Chatty Cathy" doll. I believe it was introduced to replace the line.

Here are my notes from Rosemary Jenks (an attorney from NumbersUSA) who was on the John & Ken Show today, on the current status of the Dream Act (as of late afternoon, Thursday). Others who listened, please chime in:

They were advised by Senate leadership late today (9/20) there will not be a vote on the Dream Act amendment tomorrow, Friday. The vote could come next week, and Rosemary said the more this drags out, the better for our side. The Senate is feeling the heat, which is good for those who oppose the Dream Act amnesty. [But we can't let up-- SO EVERYONE, KEEP CALLING]

Durbin has filed the amendment, but hasn't brought it up for debate.

She said the Defense Department has been calling members of Congress to lobby for the Dream Act as a pool of potential recruits. A big caveat is that this applies to "uniformed" services as well, which means, for example, the NOAA, not just the Army, Air Force etc.

Also, Durbin's current Dream Act, which is much more liberal than past versions, has waivers (loopholes) weaved throughout it, such as waivers would be available for the age 30 supposed age limit, for residency, for the two years of school etc.

The Dream Act would specifically allow the recepients to sponsor their parents, and after they received citizenship, they would be able to sponsor (bring in) siblings etc. So this would enable huge chain migration.

Regarding Lindsey Graham's quote in the Washington Times today where he basically said he could vote for the Dream Act and wants to wait and see; Rosemary said Graham's office called NumbersUSA and said he would oppose it. John and Ken believe Graham told NumbersUSA he would oppose Dream Act to forestall a barrage of phone calls.

Rosemary said they have told Senate offices they will put them on their "NO" list if they say they will oppose and vote no on the Dream Act with no caveats.

-----
SO KEEP UP YOUR HARD WORK EVERYONE! We should fill up their voice mail boxes tonight.

Anyone get through to N. Colemans DC office today? I can't believe this box is full already. I wonder if he left it full from last night?

JAK,
I got through to Sen. Coleman's DC office earlier in the day, rather abrupt conversation: "no position."

Originally Posted by LawEnforcer

KFI: Fienstein's office saying that the amnedment will not let illegal teenagers sponsor their family. THAT IS A LIE, according to NumbersUSA.

Teenagers cannot, but when they turn 21 they can and will. Since the Dream act is retroactive, probably 3 million of them have already turned 21!