Posted on 02/11/2005 10:55:36 AM PST by Jim Robinson
The Senate passed a stricter border security bill and Trent Lott announced that the Bush Amnesty Plan is DOA...hasn't a chance in hell of EVER passing in this Congress.
Just FYI
Well this is just a hit piece. I have vehemently opposed the President's immigration plan, and I'm still here.
Quiet...we can't let the DU'ers find out what the Secret Words are...:)
Well, I'm still here, and I've been quite open about being against benefits for illegals, open borders, amnesty for illegals already in the U.S., the President's signing off on the Campaign Finance Reform Bill....there's probably a few other areas, I imagine. And I've never felt that my opinion on such matters shouldn't be voice. Perhaps that's because I otherwise support President Bush 100%; I just don't have to agree with every single one of his policies.
"Bible-thumping, NRA membership owning, middle-aged, right-wing extremist males the left stereotypes us as."
Some of us are bible thumping, middle aged, NRA Membership owning, and female!
I think the site has done a terrific job of allowing open debate while expecting civility. Thanks.
Uh, maybe I don't understand what this guy is writing, but I happen to be one of the people here who think the President is trying mightily to solve a problem with immigration, and I don't fit into the FR "mainstream". Now, I haven't been BANNED or made to "fall silent". I state my opinion and realize I'm not in agreement with most here on FR.
So this guy, if I understand what he is saying, doesn't know what he is talking about.
The guy also doesn't understand the difference between "free speech" and "personal responsibility". Free Speech is guaranteed by the Constitution, but FR comes under the purview of Mr. Robinson, and he has no legal or constitutional obligation to permit ANYONE to post here. He can boot anyone he wants anytime he wants.
This same guy must think he can just walk in to any tv station in the country and get on the air with his opinion.
Everyone knows that I am against it.
Glad I am still here. ;)
Continued and steady enforcement of the existing laws would be a start. That alone would discourage most. It's common knowledge in South America that illegals are ignored - so on they come.
What makes Gheen think that you would be for "open borders" or illegal immigration? This jerks ASSumes quite a bit.
Well, it works both ways; how do you think it feels from the other side to be called an open border lover? An illegal lover? It appears that that is exactly what we are branded if we don't agree 100 percent with the "regulars." And, of course, the completely dismissive "Bushbot" label, which most seem to believe means not any of us have a single original thought and march in lockstep just because we don't go off halfcocked every single time we disagree with Bush on a policy.
In fact, using the quote of mine to inquest proves it; not the way YOU posted it, of course; it was, in fact, inquest who called ME a liar.
You know .. this BS is getting very tiresome
They sound like liberals
Can post your support for F.R. here:
http://www.theconservativevoice.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2872&com_id=3710&com_rootid=3710&com_mode=flat&com_order=0#comment3710
And much of what I have heard of the "vigilantism" along our southern border consists of private property owners whose property is continually trashed by uninvited migrants traveling through. If such a property owner needs help to protect their property is that not allowed? How does owning property along the border obligate one to tolerate trespassers?
If such migration is truly illegal, then nobody should criticize those who would use the necessary force to stop it. The people who are crossing at these places are no doubt crossing there because, at least to some extent, the law IS being enforced elsewhere along the border.
I personally don't think anyone in this Administration OR Congress has the balls to write, sponsor and submit a Bill worthy of Immigration Reform, and I still post on FR.
Thank you Mr. Robinson for the Forum to pst, read and lurk.
I agree. I do some online gaming, and by far the most enjoyable group was the one where any profanity or inference of profanity was thrown out with one warning. Even the slightest infraction got people bounced after the first warning. Those who wanted to stay learned, and as a result, people had fun. There was very little disrespect and trash talking, and people policed themselves. There didn't even need to be a moderator, as soon as someone said anything remotely bad, other players would gently warn.
That's my opinion, too.
My family all came from Germany in the years before WWI. One of my great grandfather lied to get into the army so he could fight in that war when he was just 14 years old.
Locally I know several hispanic families who came legally in the years surrounding WWII. Every single one of them that I know is opposed to illegal entrants as well.
Hey, we are going to have to put you guys in separate rooms!!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.