Dingy Harry Reid (lead democrat in U.S. Senate) has been playing a word game with respect to the Bush-Kennedy amnesty bill. Dingy Harry is actively marketing the amnesty bill as President Bush's bill. Obviously President Bush is pushing hard for the bill to pass, but it is a bi-partisan bill. Why is Dingy Harry so careful not to call it bi-partisan?

When the President got back from the G-8 conference and the amnesty bill had been defeated in the Senate, Dingy Harry advised President Bush that he needed to get his Republicans in line with his (President Bush's) bill. (By the way it might have passed, but Dingy Harry pulled it early - too much chance that some of the amendments might pass.)

Other times Dingy Harry has referred to it as the legislation that President Bush wants. There are plenty of reasons and political games that can be crafted out of this scenario. The most obvious outcome of passing this bill is that democrats essentially get what they want, while at the same time if it does not work, the democrats will point their fingers at the Republicans. Of course you know that the democrats are not going to vote for anything (not even lunch) just because President Bush wants it.

Let's remember that this is a bi-partisan bill, and if it lives, both parties should be brought to task by the American people.

djbtol