Not to endorse this guy, but the pot does needs stirring. Admit it: Don't you with Bush was saying this stuff?
To: churchillbuff
Peroutka discusses the borders: Proving that even a broken clock is right twice a day.
2 posted on
08/04/2004 8:18:45 PM PDT by
NCPAC
((Live without Fear: Don't worry about what may happen. Concentrate on what must be done.))
To: churchillbuff
You can't have "home security" if you leave the doors unlocked. Same goes for homeLAND security.
To: All
A vote for the Constitution Party is a vote for Kerry.
To: churchillbuff
Don't you wish Bush was saying this stuff? I would prefer that Bush was up 20 points in the polls so that he could afford to say this stuff.
To: churchillbuff
Admit it: Don't you with Bush was saying this stuff?----
Yes.
11 posted on
08/04/2004 8:36:59 PM PDT by
citizen
(Write-in Tom Tancredo Pres./Jeff Flake V.P. 2004!)
To: churchillbuff
"All the recent talk about the need for a so-called National Intelligence Director and other additions to the already bloated federal bureaucracy amounts to nothing more than just another reorganization of the government's organizational chart without the benefit of real change." Short version: "Same monkeys; different tree."
16 posted on
08/04/2004 8:49:26 PM PDT by
JackelopeBreeder
(Proud to be a mean-spirited and divisive loco gringo armed vigilante terrorist cucaracha!)
To: churchillbuff
the pot does needs stirring
In the middle of a critical presidential election with a radical leftist inches away from the White House? No.
And this article is just another case of the liberal press pushing on a wedge issue and telling conservatives to jump... only the gullible on the right eagerly ask how high.
17 posted on
08/04/2004 8:51:27 PM PDT by
Tamzee
(Tell me honestly, Honey... do these classified documents make me look fat?)
To: churchillbuff
Bush hasn't done squat to secure the borders, but Kerry would be worse. He'd serve the "immigrants" kool-aid at the border while Terrazzo welcomed them in five languages.
To: churchillbuff
If (hoppefully when) Bush is re-elected, but then doesn't secure the borders on his own initiative, he's going to be hearing about on a regular basis.
20 posted on
08/04/2004 9:06:26 PM PDT by
Paladin2
(Don't confuse disagreement with argumentation.)
To: churchillbuff
If (hopefully when) Bush is re-elected, he has a few months to start some initiative to actually secure the borders before he'll be inundated with some serious pressure.
21 posted on
08/04/2004 9:09:17 PM PDT by
Paladin2
(Don't confuse disagreement with argumentation.)
To: churchillbuff
My vote is already with Peroutka. The Democrats and Republicans have drifted so far from the Constitution, they are not coming back. They will continue to drift further away.
For those who view my vote for Peroutka as a vote for Kerry, you are wrong. Go browbeat those that have little understanding of our Constitution.
To vote for either major candidate would be choosing to vote for the lesser of two evils. The lesser of two evils is still evil.
My vote is to be cast with moral and Constitutional convictions.
To: churchillbuff
I'm all for secure borders and do believe the administration to have done significantly more than prior administrations concerning border security.
I also understand that the Fed's may be enlisting support from these immigrant smugglers, the so called coyotes, to inform them of any "non-typical" cases. This is not in my opinion the best case scenario but it does have some merit.
29 posted on
08/05/2004 3:22:24 AM PDT by
fso301
To: churchillbuff
Homeland Security Means Securing our Borders Exactly what 70-80% of ALL Americans have said on every poll re: illegal invaders/borders.
Too bad neither party is worried about 'pandering' for those votes
32 posted on
08/06/2004 1:31:51 PM PDT by
txdoda
("Navy Brat")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson