When presented with Rasmussen’s poll question, “Should the U.S. Justice Department take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants?” 62 percent of voters responded Yes.
However, it’s unlikely that the Obama DoJ would ever investigate a policy that the Democrats support so whole heartedly (except when it’s inconvenient).
Another question concerned cutting off federal funding for sanctuary cities, and that strategy is far more likely to gain traction since it falls within Congressional powers. Senator Tom Cotton has submitted legislation to defund illegal-alien-protecting cities. In the House, Congressmen Lou Barletta, Matt Salmon and Duncan Hunter have introduced similar bills. Certainly there will be many sponsors in the House. Obama would hate to sign defunding into law, but such legislation draws a line that the GOP desperately needs to make, particularly after its snuggling up with the President to pass his power-grabbing trade deal.
Following the murder of a young woman in San Francisco by an illegal immigrant from Mexico, voters want to get tough on so-called “sanctuary cities” that refuse to enforce immigration laws.
Sixty-two percent (62%) of Likely U.S. Voters think the U.S. Justice Department should take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 26% oppose Justice Department action against sanctuary cities. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Fifty-eight percent (58%) believe the federal government should cut off funds to cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants. Thirty-two percent (32%) disagree, while 10% are not sure. This marks little change from May 2011 when legislation was unsuccessfully proposed in Congress to stop all federal funding for sanctuary cities.
Republicans and unaffiliated voters are much stronger supporters of both actions than Democrats are.
In addition to San Francisco, numerous major cities in the United States are now sanctuary cities including New York, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, Miami, Denver, Chicago, Philadelphia, Houston and Detroit.
JUDGE JEANNINE: The White House wants people fully engaged in the Presidential election for 2016. You worked in the Justice Department on voting rights. What is going on in respect to illegals and the possibility of their voting?
ADAMS: The Obama administration is doing everything it can to inject new voters in the 2016 election, Judge. In DHS for example, they’ve issued orders to get all nine million green card holders — these are legal permanent residents — converted to citizenship before the 2016 election. Of course, most of them are going to vote one way: you can understand why the Obama administration is doing this. Those are the people who are here legally.
They’re also affecting the pipeline of people here illegally. The Supreme Court just this week received briefs in a case where the federal government is stopping states like Kansas and Arizona from checking to make sure that people are actually citizens when they register to vote, and the Obama administration justice department, the Election Assistance Commission, which is a federal agency, has tried to block states from making sure that only citizens are registering to vote. Continue reading this article
Illegal aliens have a lot for which to be thankful this season, given that Obama’s unconstitutional amnesty will give work permits to at least five million foreign job thieves. Plus, the President’s cornucopian package includes Social Security and Medicare even though the he claimed his amnesty wouldn’t cover benefits that cost taxpayers billions of dollars yearly. In addition, businesses now have a big financial incentive to hire illegals because they are not required to receive Obamacare.
Funny how the system is being rejiggered to screw the citizens and benefit the invasive foreigners.
Border watchdog and filmmaker Dennis Michael Lynch appeared on Fox News on Thanksgiving morning to discuss the government’s inducement to hire illegals, including some observations as a former employer:
LYNCH: Let me explain how this works using my own company. I used to have 250 employees. Fifty of them would be front office workers, sales, marketing etc, I gave them insurance. My guys in the back though, the lower-skilled, the lower-wage, I can’t afford to give them insurance. So if I don’t give them insurance I get hit with a fine. Now that fine could be anywhere from two thousand and five thousand, not three, could be anywhere between. So if you look at the higher range, if I don’t pay insurance I have to pay a million dollar fine — five thousand times two hunderd employees. But now because Obamacare is not given to anyone legal US citizens or legal aliens, the illegal aliens — the five million or I think more like 10 million, who just got the work permits from President Obama — I can now hire them legally and get rid of my US citizen employees and save myself the million dollars. . .
I find something very ironic. He gave the other day after Ferguson a speech in Chicago about how it is that there are so many hardships in the black community and then he goes on and talks about his amnesty. Anybody who’s familiar with this knows that amnesty of this kind throws the black community under the bus. We’ve got 22 percent unemployment for young black men, highest in this country, in some cities it’s 50 percent.
So now what happens is that these people are all going to go in and take those jobs. Employers are going to be forced to hire the illegal aliens. if you think about it because the Obamacare businessman the employer mandate suffers you. It actually pins the employer versus the employee in a way that’s like the Hunger Games, so you bring in the illegal aliens and that’s it. I think he knows exactly what he’s doing. It’s devastating for the economy because you’re going to look at those 200 employees that I had — where are they going? They’re going on the welfare line. . .
And don’t think for one moment that the illegal alien who just got this work permit who might be picking crops or hanging sheetrock is going to say “Ooh, now I can do that legally.” They’re going to be able to go to those better payroll jobs, working at UPS, working at the United States Postal Service. This is devastating to the American worker.
Under the president’s new amnesty, businesses will have a $3,000-per-employee incentive to hire illegal immigrants over native-born workers because of a quirk of Obamacare.
President Obama’s temporary amnesty, which lasts three years, declares up to 5 million illegal immigrants to be lawfully in the country and eligible for work permits, but it still deems them ineligible for public benefits such as buying insurance on Obamacare’s health exchanges.
Under the Affordable Care Act, that means businesses who hire them won’t have to pay a penalty for not providing them health coverage — making them $3,000 more attractive than a similar native-born worker, whom the business by law would have to cover.
The loophole was confirmed by congressional aides and drew condemnation from those who said it put illegal immigrants ahead of Americans in the job market.
“If it is true that the president’s actions give employers a $3,000 incentive to hire those who came here illegally, he has added insult to injury,” said Rep. Lamar Smith, Texas Republican. “The president’s actions would have just moved those who came here illegally to the front of the line, ahead of unemployed and underemployed Americans.”
A Department of Homeland Security official confirmed that the newly legalized immigrants won’t have access to Obamacare, which opens up the loophole for employers looking to avoid the penalty. Continue reading this article
Most voters rate the federal government’s handling of illegal immigration as poor and think states should be able to act on their own to stop the problem. They also favor use of the National Guard in their own state to deal with illegal immigrants.
Just 13% of Likely U.S. Voters now think the federal government is doing a good or excellent job dealing with the illegal immigration problem in this country. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% rate the government’s performance in this area as poor. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Sixty percent (60%) believe a state should have the right to enforce current immigration laws if it believes the federal government is not enforcing them. Just 28% disagree, while 12% are undecided.
This is comparable to findings in December 2011 when Arizona announced its intention to go it alone because of the federal government’s failure to enforce immigration laws. But the Obama administration challenged the state’s effort in court, and the U.S. Supreme Court ultimately limited what Arizona could do.
Texas Governor Rick Perry also has been critical of the federal government’s handling of the current immigration crisis and has announced plans to send his state’s National Guard to the border to stop the flow of illegal immigrants. Sixty-one percent (61%) of voters nationwide favor using their state’s National Guard if necessary to deal with illegal immigration. Only 27% are opposed. Twelve percent (12%) are not sure. Continue reading this article
(Reuters) – As President Barack Obama considers sidestepping Congress to loosen U.S. immigration policy, a Reuters/Ipsos poll shows Americans are deeply worried that illegal immigration is threatening the nation’s culture and economy.
Seventy percent of Americans – including 86 percent of Republicans – believe undocumented immigrants threaten traditional U.S. beliefs and customs, according to the poll.
The findings suggest immigration could join Obamacare – the healthcare insurance overhaul – and the economy as hot button issues that encourage more Republicans to vote in November’s congressional election.
With Congress failing to agree on broad immigration reforms, Obama could act alone in the next few weeks to give work permits to up to 5 million undocumented immigrants and delay some deportations, according to media reports.
Hispanic and liberal voters would welcome that, but the online survey suggests much of the rest of the nation may not.
Despite arguments from the White House and groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that legal immigration benefits business, 63 percent of people in the online survey also said immigrants place a burden on the economy. Continue reading this article
Americans don’t want illegal or excessive immigration. When the issue has been in the news, like in 2010 when the Arizona law was in the headlines, polling shows the sentiment that is always there, that citizens want their borders and sovereignty enforced, not ignored.
Now, when citizens see the full horror of the liberal ideal of a borderless America, they are appalled.
Most voters don’t want any of the young illegal immigrants who’ve recently arrived here housed in their state and say any legislation passed by Congress to deal with the problem should focus on sending them home as soon as possible.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 59% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the primary focus of any new immigration legislation passed by Congress should be to send the young illegal immigrants back home as quickly as possible. Just 27% say it should focus instead on making it easier for these illegal immigrants to remain in the United States. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Advocates for the illegal immigrants argue that they are flooding into the country to escape violent situations in their home countries, but just 31% of U.S. voters think they are coming here now for their own safety. Most voters (52%) believe they are coming here for economic reasons. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.
Voters are more uncertain, however, when it comes to the $3.7 billion in new spending that President Obama has asked for from Congress to deal with these new illegal immigrants. Twenty-six percent (26%) think Congress should approve the president’s request even if it does not provide for quicker deportation of these illegals, but 40% oppose approval if money for sped-up deportation is not included. One-in-three voters (34%) are not sure.
A retired doctor and his wife phoned Rush Limbaugh on Tuesday to tell their story about the San Bernardino Catholic church urging members of the parish welcome illegal aliens into their homes. Not only did the archbishop invite parishioners to harbor lawbreakers (a felony, right?) but he also to keep quiet about it to the media. Furthermore, the government put the church up to the scheme.
No problema about the cost though, since the church promised to reimburse the generous (if foolish) care providers. However, the Catholic church receives millions of Americans’ tax dollars to pursue its alleged good works of refugee resettlement and other immigration services, shown as “Government Revenue” in the 2010 Catholic Charities graph, so it’s not so surprising that Washington and the church would work in partnership:
Retired Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony was a big supporter of illegal alien amnesty, as when he protested Arizona’s immigration enforcement law in 2010.
Limbaugh was properly shocked by the call, particularly given his newfound interest in the America-killing immigration catastrophe of open borders. He has been slow on the uptake but seems more comfortable with the subject lately.
RUSH: This is Ann and Ed in Southern California. Welcome. It’s great to have you on the phone. Hello.
ANN: Hi, Rush. How are you?
RUSH: Just fine. Thank you very much.
ANN: Great. Well, we have some interesting news. My husband Eddie is on the phone with us. We live in Southern California, and we’re Catholic, active Catholics in our community, and there was a town hall meeting last evening, emergency meeting called by our local parish priest, ordered by our bishop (unintelligible) and the Archdiocese of San Bernardino. They have made the decision that they’re going to absorb the immigrants that are coming through because the federal government called the bishop’s office on Monday and they’re gonna be busing these immigrants to our communities and asking us to open our homes and to house them for up to a month. The church will reimburse us for any out-of-pocket expenses and we were told not to talk to anybody about it, especially the media. I’m not especially happy about it. My husband is a retired doctor, and he will share his concerns with you regarding this matter. Eddie, do you want to go ahead and talk about your thoughts?
EDDIE: Longtime listener, Rush. Thanks —
RUSH: Thank you, Eddie.
EDDIE: I’m very concerned about the health care crisis that we’re facing and these illegal aliens that are coming into the United States. Doctors are being asked not to talk to the media, they’re on gag orders, both doctors and nurses, and we got a big problem because there are a lot of diseases that can come through this border bringing all kinds of stuff —
RUSH: Eddie, I just read that in some cases the lice are so bad you can see them crawling down the faces of some of the kids.
ANN: Yeah, the lice won’t kill you, but Ebola will, and so will gonorrhea and there’s syphilis and AIDS and hepatitis and diphtheria and polio, meningitis, and this new coronavirus coming in from the Middle East, so —
RUSH: Hang on. I gotta take a break. Hold your thought and we’ll continue after the break.
RUSH: We rejoin Ann and her retired doctor husband, Eddie, on the phone jointly, together with us from Southern California. Eddie, could you put Ann back to the phone or is she on with you?
ANN: Yes. Hi. I’m here with you.
RUSH: Okay, Eddie, I’ll come back to you in just a second, but, Ann, I want to clarify. Did you say that it is the Catholic Church that the government called and asked for assistance?
Limbaugh portrays himself as a great patriot, the Mayor of Realville, but he has routinely ignored the one issue that will permanently transform America into just another failed liberal conglomeration. When he has spoken on demographic remaking of the nation, he has been informative, but apparently has not seen it as important, often not mentioning immigration for weeks at a time unless brought up by a caller.
Now I think this would be a great time for me to give you a little bit more detail on what’s happening with this influx of illegal kids crossing the border. Remember, they’re not from Mexico, we’re told. These are “unaccompanied alien children,” and they have a name, UACs, and they are from Central America, which means El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua. Not Mexico. And they are “pouring in.”
They’re pouring into Arizona and they’re pouring into Texas, which has consequences. When they get across the border they are being “transferred to Border Patrol facilities elsewhere along the border — US government officials are scrambling to find places to put them.” Here’s the problem: “[B]ased on current immigration and asylum laws, the vast majority of those children could be legally staying right here in the United States before long.”
Now, remember, the conventional wisdom in Washington is the Republicans had better adopt the policies of the Democrats so that they get some Hispanic support so that they can win some elections again. And if they don’t do that, it’s sayonara — or adios. Yet here we have the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, “Hispanics Help Drive President Obama’s Approval Rating to a Fresh Low.”
How is this possible?
Republicans are buying into the idea that they have to be for amnesty to win Hispanic votes, yet Obama’s erased the border, he’s promised illegals amnesty, and he’s tanking in this poll. We’re being overrun at the moment with unaccompanied children from Central America. Maybe could it be that the Hispanic population of this country wants a secure nation just like everybody else?
This president — who has presided over the opening of the Southern border to tens of thousands (if not hundreds of thousands now) illegal aliens and children, not just from Mexico, but from other Central American countries — is going to come before you today and present himself as an expert and eminently qualified to detail for us our future policy in Iraq.
Since temporary housing seems to be a problem, can’t Sheriff Arpaio set up a few more tents? When the 2013 sequester drama played out in illegals being released from prison, he offered free jail space to house the foreign pests.
Some people say they are shocked at the border chaos (“urgent humanitarian crisis” according to MSM), but it’s only Obama using his executive power to welcome future Democrats.
Retired INS Senior Special Agent Mike Cutler suggests that the thousands of unaccompanied illegal alien kiddies be reunited with their US-residing families and then ship the whole bunch home — family reunification done correctly!
The estimated tab for American taxpayers to provide welfare for illegal alien children from Latin America keeps rising and is now up to $2.3 billion next year.
Incidentally, opening the border to the world is likely to prove an irresistable magnet to jihadists and other enemies.
Naturally, Arizona Governor Jan Brewer fired off a sternly worded letter of complaint to the White House, but the squirrelly media loves to focus on the adorable kiddies and their parent-caused travails.
PHOENIX (KSAZ) – One day after Arizona Governor Jan Brewer fired off a letter to President Obama, concerned about dozens of undocumented immigrants being dropped off at a Phoenix bus station, another bus load of immigrants arrived.
Early Tuesday morning FOX 10 saw a bus load of people dropped off by a bus with Department of Homeland Security markings.
The Greyhound spokesperson said that Arizona is the only state they’re aware of that is getting bus loads of people.
The Greyhound bus station near 24th St & Buckeye has turned into a refuge for bus loads of immigrants being dropped off by DHS.
FOX 10 was told immigration officials are moving hundreds of undocumented workers caught in Texas who are from Central America to Arizona. DHS says they don’t have the manpower to process them all.
Volunteers dropped off Powerade, diapers, and toys for the kids.
“I’m a mother with small children, I can’t imagine how exhausted, tired, and scared the women are. So I just wanted to be able to help them in any way possible,” said Ella Herrington.
A spokesperson for Greyhound said that up until a couple of days ago they were not given any notice that large groups of people were being dropped off. They say this had never happened before.
“We do not have an agreement of any kind with ICE or the U.S. Border Patrol. We recently established protocol with them which they now will inform us going forward several hours in advance before dropping off large groups of people to ensure we have the resources to accommodate them once they arrive,” said Lanesha Gipson. Continue reading this article
When I was a child, I recall political discussions in my family about whether the Catholic candidate John Kennedy would follow the orders of the Vatican if elected President. My parents were great supporters of President Eisenhower, a Presbyterian, and were suspicious of a possible Pope influence in the White House.
These days, the influence of Catholic elites to subvert the American interest is not mentioned in polite company — although it clearly occurs with clerical demands for an amnesty for millions of foreign lawbreakers, many of whom are Catholic. The powerful Conference of Bishops has spent millions of dollars to lobby for amnesty against Americans.
A recent blatant example of the Catholic amnesty shakedown was a piece in Time saying Speaker Boehner “must decide between the social teaching of his faith and the political agenda of a fringe element of his party.”
Right, the Vaticrats regard the majority of citizens who want immigration to be a legal procedure to be “fringe.” In addition, the Tea Party is seen as part of that fringe and stands against the Gospel — that’s the imperious attitude of the know-it-all Catholic church.
The intimidation is strongly worded and sounds like a command from a superior: “If Speaker Boehner continues to balk on this crucial issue, he’ll face the uncomfortable reality of being in a public dispute with his Church.”
Catholic leaders are calling on House Speaker John Boehner to act swiftly on immigration reform
Three years ago Speaker of the House John Boehner received an honorary degree from the Catholic University of America, a prestigious religious institution that was founded and is still largely governed by the bishops of the United States. But the times have clearly changed.
Last week, the same bishops paid a visit to Capitol Hill to put more pressure on Speaker Boehner to pass comprehensive immigration reform this summer. This comes on the heels of a trip earlier this spring by the same bishops to the border town of Nogales, Arizona.
There Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley said that the bishops came on behalf of the Church in the United States “to be a neighbor and to find a neighbor in each of the suffering people who risk their lives and at times lose their lives in the desert.” Following his homily, Cardinal O’Malley and his brother bishops made a poignant gesture by reaching across the border fence to distribute communion to Mexicans on the other side.
Last week’s Mass and Capitol Hill visits were led by Miami Archbishop Thomas Wenski. In his homily, Wenski had pointed words for lawmakers: “[o]ur immigration system is a stain on the soul of our nation. As a moral matter, it must be changed. We must pray that our elected officials recognize this and have the courage to reform it.”
Courage is exactly what the Speaker of the House needs right now. Nearly a year ago, the United States Senate passed a sweeping immigration reform bill. Boehner has said he won’t bring the bill to the House floor unless a majority of his Republican colleagues support it. But with nearly all Democrats supporting the bill, it’s clear that it would pass if it were brought to the floor for a vote. It’s widely known that Boehner personally supports immigration reform. In fact, earlier this year, he even went as far as to mock his fellow House Republicans who were afraid to take up the issues.
Make no mistake: Boehner’s opposition to the bill is purely political. He’s afraid that bringing up immigration reform will hurt his party in the fall elections and even hamper his own chances to be re-elected Speaker of the House. But recent polling suggests the former is unlikely.
If Speaker Boehner continues to balk on this crucial issue, he’ll face the uncomfortable reality of being in a public dispute with his Church. Educated by Jesuit and Marianist priests in Cincinnati, this is no small deal to the fifth Catholic elected United States Speaker of the House.
A national coalition of Catholic leaders calling on Speaker Boehner to act put it well: “[the current situation] is immoral and shameful. The eyes of our God — who hungers for justice and commands us to welcome the stranger and bind the wounds of those left by the side of the road — are on us. …As Catholics who share your commitment to the sanctity of life in the womb, we must not be complicit in the suffering of migrants dying in the shadows.
Speaker Boehner now must decide between the social teaching of his faith and the political agenda of a fringe element of his party. He doesn’t face this decision alone, however. If he stands up against the Tea Party and for the Gospel on this critical issue, he’ll find a Church who is willing to walk with him the entire way. That’s a team worth being on: after all, it is faith—not politics—that saves us in the end.
Christopher Hale is a senior fellow at Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good. He helped lead national Catholic outreach for President Obama’s re-election campaign. You can follow him on Twitter @chrisjollyhale.
Thursday’s LA Times had a front-page pair of stories about the two Republican candidates for Governor. The primary is June 3, and the state’s southern voice may have thought it should pretend an interest in non-Democrats.
The story about Tim Donnelly was mostly fair, but it couldn’t resist a mini-smear by quoting the SPLC’s sour leftwing gripe against his support for American sovereignty and immigration enforcement.
State Assemblyman Tim Donnelly was showing off his home, an unpretentious four-bedroom high in the mountains near Lake Arrowhead that, given his low-budget run for governor, doubles as a campaign office.
He hurried past his son blasting away at animated enemies on the TV screen, past the three campaign staffers hunched over computers in the dining room and the Yorkiepoo terrier Rusty, begging to be played with in the kitchen.
But when the Republican candidate arrived at a little office at the back of the garage, he paused. Pointing to a desk laced with cobwebs, he said this musty, abandoned room was central to who he is and why he is running for governor.
This, he said, is where he ran his plastic-parts business, until that business collapsed, bringing his family to the brink of financial ruin.
Many politicians might take pains to whitewash such a failure. Donnelly, who captured his Assembly seat in an upset in 2010, just before dissolving his business, wears the defeat like a badge, touting it on the campaign trail as a reason voters should elect him.
The approach plays to his conservative tea party supporters and fits right in with an old strain in American politics — an outsider stressing that status, the better to run against the establishment. Continue reading this article
Is the Washington Post developing a lib-crush on Jeb Bush? The paper featured a curious piece about Bush on Monday’s front page (“For Jeb Bush, a family decision”), celebrating his appeal to diversity via the Mexican wife, but the article brings up ancient history that may have been forgotten by the public. One item: daughter Noelle’s several run-ins with the law concerning drugs, including a famous 2002 mug shot (shown).
Incidentally, the mainstream press exhibited fondness for John McCain whom they characterized as a “maverick” but the affection for the Arizona Senator disappeared when he actually ran for President. The liberal media is not a reliable squeeze.
The media likes liberal Republicans, particularly the ones who support a firehose supply of cheap foreign workers. The scribbler class appreciates inexpensive household help.
Still, the article has too many negative details of the Jeb Bush narrative to be considered a full-on puff piece. We read that Jeb and Mexican wife Columba speak Spanish together; is English not comfortable for her? (At least candidate John Kerry’s immigrant wife, billionaire Teresa Heinz, was an adequate speaker of America’s language.) Plus, there’s the druggie daughter “hiding crack cocaine in her shoe.”
Perhaps if Jeb were to expand on his statement that illegal immigration is an “act of love” then that might get more positive press clips. Too bad for Jeb that the voters are sick of open borders fawning from elites.
Jeb Bush can trace some of his most appealing qualities as a potential presidential candidate for a diversifying electorate to his 40-year partnership with his Mexican-born wife, Columba.
The couple speak Spanish to one another, and their lives have been immersed in Hispanic culture and the immigrant experience.
But Columba’s intense distaste for the public arena is one of the issues weighing most heavily on the former Florida governor as he grapples with whether to run for the White House in 2016, according to interviews with friends, former staffers and GOP donors close to the family. These people said Columba may be willing to take on the burdens of a campaign, yet even then the couple would need to find a way to craft a comfortable role for her.
“Columba is not in any way power-ambitious,” said Rafael A. Peñalver Jr., a Miami lawyer who has been friends with the Bush family since the early 1980s. “She is a very private person.” He added: “She’s supportive and will stand by him, even taking roles that are not in her nature.”
Still, another Bush confidante said, “the family issues are Columba, 1, 2 and 3. It’s whether she’s up for it.”
“She’s cognizant of what a campaign would be like, and she would have to come to terms with that. He’s not going to do it over her objections,” said the confidante, who like a number of loyalists, spoke only on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal deliberations of the family.
Both Bushes declined to be interviewed, and spokeswoman Kristy Campbell declined to comment on his behalf.
Jeb Bush, 61, has acknowledged that he is thinking about running, indicating he will make a decision later this year. He has repeatedly said he will decide based on whether he believes he can run an optimistic, hopeful campaign — run “joyfully,” as he has put it — as well as whether a campaign would be the right thing for his family.
Presidential campaigns have come to rely heavily on candidates’ family members playing visible roles such as fundraising, speaking and submitting to media interviews. Spouses have increasingly become full-fledged fill-ins for the candidates. Sons and daughters help the candidate forge ties with younger voters and can soften and humanize a candidate’s image.
The pressure for family participation could be more intense on Bush, who is so widely identified as the scion of a political dynasty and who could find himself facing a campaign by Hillary Rodham Clinton that fully incorporates her husband and daughter Chelsea as political allies.
People close to Bush say the impact a modern presidential campaign would have on his wife and children remains the most important piece of a difficult family decision that goes far beyond a simple political analysis of whether voters want another Bush in the White House. In addition to Columba’s reluctance, he must consider their 36-year-old daughter, Noelle. Her struggles with drug addiction burst into the headlines 12 years ago when she was arrested, but she has since dropped almost entirely from public view. Continue reading this article
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.