Sorry, Jeb, we’re not feeling the love

Boston Herald ^ | 4/9/14 | Howie Carr

[raccoonradio]

So Jeb Bush thinks it’s an “act of love” for illegal aliens to sneak into the country.

Guess what, Jeb — it’s going to be an act of love for millions of Republicans and independents to vote against you in the Republican presidential primaries in 2016.

“A great country ought to know where those folks are and politely ask them to leave,” Jeb said Sunday.

You couldn’t pry these illegals out of here with the Jaws of Life. At least not as long as they’re collecting TANF, SNAP, Sect. 8, MassHealth — the full Tsarnaev, in other words.

“The way I look at this,” he said, “is someone who comes to our country because they couldn’t come legally, they come to our country because their families — the dad who loved their children — was worried that their children didn’t have food on the table. … It’s an act of love.”

Jeb, what about all the Americans who worry that this invasion of tens of millions of illegal aliens is bankrupting the nation — would it be an “act of love” for all those citizens, yes citizens, to vote against the politicians who are pandering to these invaders?

Is it an act of love to want to stop these hordes of illegals from going to state colleges for free because they’ll be depriving your tax-paying American children of their earned (as opposed to unearned) place at the table?

Jeb, you talk about keeping families intact. How about the Denice family of Milford? That American family was shattered by one of your “dreamers,” or should we now call them “lovers.” This illegal from Ecuador happened to be driving unlicensed and drunk, with his anchor baby beside him in the front seat, when he ran over a young American college graduate named Matthew Denice.

This dreamer, er lover, now claims he can’t speak English or Spanish, even though he was somehow able to order a couple of six packs of Bud Light. This happened in 2011, but the illegal still hasn’t been tried. The judge says as an Indian, he apparently lacks an enzyme to metabolize alcohol, which I guess makes it OK to kill Americans while driving drunk.

“It shouldn’t rile people up that people are actually coming to this country to provide for their families.”

Jeb, have you ever been to a hospital emergency room on a Saturday night? Or a district court on a Monday morning? Or a Walmart on the morning after the EBT cards are refilled?

Jeb, your brother used to say that they were only coming here to do the jobs that Americans won’t do. Yet somehow, when the illegals have their demonstrations at the State House demanding ever more handouts, it’s always on a weekday, during business hours. Don’t they have jobs, you know, like the Tea Party people do?

Run, Jeb, run. I and millions of other Americans can’t wait to vote against you.

[raccoonradio]

Wed Howie column list ping

[Rummyfan]

Jeb Bush? He's a non-starter and would be out after the New Hampshire primary. People are sick of the Bushes and the Clintons....*

*: Don't get me wrong, I loved W even though he was sometimes on the wrong track. But, enough already.

[dforest]

Rove was beside himself at how Jeb displayed his honest opinion. Jeb is supposed to be more cagey.

I appreciate the truth and I have no problem saying I cannot vote for Jeb Bush.

[jsanders2001]

A message that needs to be distributed everywhere.

[OpusatFR]

Bush? Kiss of death for 2016. Even Hillary has more prospects than he does.

[Paladin2]

Families can just as readily reunite in Mexico.

Jeb should exhibit his love and go fix Mexico so we all would rather live their than here with the ever increasing fascist government of 0bama here.

[Paladin2]

Families can just as readily reunite in Mexico.

Jeb should exhibit his love and go fix Mexico so we all would rather live there than here with the ever increasing fascist government of 0bama here.

[Yosemitest]

"Run, Jeb, run. I and millions of other Americans can’t wait to vote against you."

Yeah, you and a million Democrats COMMUNISTS.

Personally, I can't wait to vote AGAINST Jeb Bush ! I'm SICK of RINOs, "Establishment Republicans" , what ever ...
I can't wait to return all the stabs in the back they've given us.
"Establishment Republicans" lose everytime they're listened to.
They wouldn't care if they DO lose.
If they can't be in power, they don't want US in power.
It's just that simple.
It's WAR!

"Establishment Republicans" Want to Redefine the Term "Conservative"

"DO CONSERVATIVES WANT TO WIN IN 2012 OR NOT?"

DO CONSERVATIVES "ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS" WANT TO WIN IN 2014 OR NOT?

Jack Kerwick wrote an article on May 24, 2011 titled The Tea Partier versus The Republican and he expressed some important issues that I agree with.

Thus far, the field of GOP presidential contenders, actual and potential, isn’t looking too terribly promising.

This, though, isn’t meant to suggest that any of the candidates, all things being equal, lack what it takes to insure
that Barack Obama never sees the light of a second term; nor is it the case that I find none of the candidates appealing.
Rather, I simply mean that at this juncture, the party faithful is far from unanimously energized over any of them.

It is true that it was the rapidity and aggressiveness with which President Obama proceeded to impose his perilous designs upon the country
that proved to be the final spark to ignite the Tea Party movement.
But the chain of events that lead to its emergence began long before Obama was elected.
That is, it was actually the disenchantment with the Republican Party under our “compassionate conservative” president, George W. Bush,
which overcame legions of conservatives that was the initial inspiration that gave rise to the Tea Party.

It is this frustration with the GOP’s betrayal of the values that it affirms that accounts for why the overwhelming majority
of those who associate with or otherwise sympathize with the Tea Party movement
refuse to explicitly or formally identify with the Republican Party.
And it is this frustration that informs the Tea Partiers’ threat to create a third party
in the event that the GOP continues business as usual.

If and when those conservatives and libertarians who compose the bulk of the Tea Party, decided that the Republican establishment
has yet to learn the lessons of ’06 and ’08, choose to follow through with their promise,
they will invariably be met by Republicans with two distinct but interrelated objections.

First,
they will be told that they are utopian, “purists” foolishly holding out for an “ideal” candidate.

Second, because virtually all members of the Tea Party would have otherwise voted Republican if not for this new third party,
they will be castigated for essentially giving elections away to Democrats.



Both of these criticisms are, at best, misplaced; at worst, they are just disingenuous.
At any rate, they are easily answerable.

Let’s begin with the argument against “purism.” To this line, two replies are in the coming.


No one, as far as I have ever been able to determine, refuses to vote for anyone who isn’t an ideal candidate.
Ideal candidates, by definition, don’t exist.
This, after all, is what makes them ideal.
This counter-objection alone suffices to expose the argument of the Anti-Purist as so much counterfeit.
But there is another consideration that militates decisively against it.

A Tea Partier who refrains from voting for a Republican candidate who shares few if any of his beliefs
can no more be accused of holding out for an ideal candidate
than can someone who refuses to marry a person with whom he has little to anything in common
be accused of holding out for an ideal spouse.
In other words, the object of the argument against purism is the most glaring of straw men:
“I will not vote for a thoroughly flawed candidate” is one thing;
“I will only vote for a perfect candidate” is something else entirely.



As for the second objection against the Tea Partier’s rejection of those Republican candidates who eschew his values and convictions,
it can be dispensed with just as effortlessly as the first.

Every election season—and at no time more so than this past season—Republicans pledge to “reform Washington,” “trim down” the federal government, and so forth.
Once, however, they get elected and they conduct themselves with none of the confidence and enthusiasm with which they expressed themselves on the campaign trail,
those who placed them in office are treated to one lecture after the other on the need for “compromise” and “patience.”

Well, when the Tea Partier’s impatience with establishment Republican candidates intimates a Democratic victory,
he can use this same line of reasoning against his Republican critics.
My dislike for the Democratic Party is second to none, he can insist.
But in order to advance in the long run my conservative or Constitutionalist values, it may be necessary to compromise some in the short term.

For example,

as Glenn Beck once correctly noted in an interview with Katie Couric,
had John McCain been elected in 2008, it is not at all improbable that, in the final analysis,
the country would have been worse off than it is under a President Obama.
McCain would have furthered the country’s leftward drift,
but because this movement would have been slower,
and because McCain is a Republican, it is not likely that the apparent awakening that occurred under Obama would have occurred under McCain.


It may be worth it, the Tea Partier can tell Republicans, for the GOP to lose some elections if it means that conservatives—and the country—will ultimately win.

If he didn’t know it before, the Tea Partier now knows that accepting short-term loss in exchange for long-term gain is the essence of compromise, the essence of politics.

Ironically, he can thank the Republican for impressing this so indelibly upon him.

Read Compromise Is a Dirty Word for Club for Growth.

We will never unify under "Establishment Republicans" .
"Establishment Republicans" have more in common with the Democrats, than they do with Conservatives.
The weak candidates are "Establishment Republicans", weak on national security, amnesty for illegals, abortion, and government spending.
"Establishment Republicans" scream "COMPROMISE".
And people who study the Bible know that COMPROMISE almost always leads to destruction.
These "Establishment Republicans" are being weeded out, one by one, and slowly but surely, the TEA Party is taking over.

I'm fresh out of "patience", and I'm not in the mood for "compromise".
"COMPROMISE" to me is a dirty word.
Let the RINO's compromise their values, with the conservatives, for a change.

The "Establishment Republicans" can go to hell!

[DIRTYSECRET]

Smart idea. I agree w/Rush. Bush is trying to sabotage himself.

[TomGuy]

Earlier this week, Mark Levin played some clips of a recent Jeb Bush media interview [not on Levin's program]. During the clips, Jeb was inarticulate and incoherent, as he claimed immigrants (illegal) come here out of 'love for their families'. Some of the things he said did not even make sense. Levin noted that.

==

Previously:

“Immigrants are more fertile, and they love families, and they have more intact families, and they bring a younger population,” he said, adding that immigrants also create new businesses and are an “engine of economic prosperity.”
--Jeb Bush, 6/14/2013, video

==

Just what the GOP needs -- another 'compassionate conservative bigger-tent' Republican.

[relictele]

Rove’s continued influence mystifies me and his drip-drip-drip approach to policy and platform is a recipe for disaster.

What is Rove’s pedigree? Got the son of a president elected to Texas governorship with huge advantages in name recognition and cash? 2000 election in which we sweated out a dead heat (the usual Dem cheating notwithstanding)? A 2004 election in which we and the incumbent sweated out a win over a thickheaded, traitorous Mass. lefty?

Rove is the Marty Schottenheimer of politics: he will win 51-49 or lose 49-51 but he will make sure he keeps his job. Dems love him more than the GOP base which should tell us something.

[Texas Eagle]

“The way I look at this,” he said, “is someone who comes to our country because they couldn’t come legally....

They CAN'T come here legally???

What's stopping them?

Don't we have an entire bloated bureaucracy dedicated to bringing people into this country legally?

What do people at the INS do all day? Sit at their computers and watch porn?

Or am I thinking of another bloated bureaucracy dedicated to solving another of the world's problems?

[Tax-chick]

Rabid wombat ping.

[Telepathic Intruder]

I doubt they have the best interest of American citizens in mind when they’re stealing (yes, stealing) our jobs.

[Texas Eagle]

Yo, J.E.B., do you get warm fuzzies thinking about the terrorists who come into this country illegally, too?

Napolitano: Terrorists Enter Country Through Mexico From Time to Time"

[TomGuy]

Jobs Americans won't do? Very few, according to the May 2013 report linked below:

Are There Really Jobs Americans Won’t Do?
A detailed look at immigrant and native employment across occupations

http://cis.org/are-there-really-jobs-americans-wont-do

[Little Ray]

What Jeb-boy is not thinking about is that WE DON’T CARE.
Immigration to the US is not for the good of the Immigrants, but for the good of the US. And illegal aliens are NOT good for the US.

[Dqban22]

There is not love for the millions of American unemployed. There are 91 million Americasn out of the work force, thank to Obama we have the lowest participation in the work force since the 1970’s and some demagogues want to wide open our borders to hundreds of millions around the world who would love to enjoy the American dream... but that dream is becoming in an American nightmare for those born here and those who came legally to enjoy our way of live loving the U.S. as much as their country of birth.

[goldstategop]

Jeb’s problem is that he’s out of touch with what Americans think. He’s been living a cloistered life since he left office.

And yes, I would vote against him because he’s all the things I’m not looking for in our next President. We don’t need a Republican Obama for sure.

Wave him good-bye!