Skip to comments.
Poll: Will Bush's proposal to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens affect your vote?
CitizensLobby.com ^
| 1/9/2004
| CitizensLobby
Posted on 01/09/2004 6:33:02 AM PST by YoungKentuckyConservative
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-138 next last
To: gatorbait
We cannot afford to give in to knee jerk hysteria. Whole lot of that going on around here.
Great to read your well thought out posts, with all the hyperbole going on.
To: browardchad
Stranger is the argument that while we lack the resources and "cannot set up border guard towers every 500 feet" we will have the resources to do background checks and follow up on perhaps millions of "guest" workers.
I am not saying we should set up such towers but how can a GOPer argue they cannot increase the security of the borders while at the same time argue to increase the resources to monitor people once they have reached base and tagged in as "safe"!
In this case secruing our borders does not garner votes while "monitoring" those that made it past our security does.
I am not even touching on the its a post 9/11 world in which we should use more of our INS resources to monitor unfriendlies rather than cheap labor.
Listen to Raush's last half hour of today. He summed up what we are all facing here quite nicely.
102
posted on
01/09/2004 1:39:00 PM PST
by
Kay Soze
(How will refocusing INS resources from the war on terror to millions of Mexicans make US safer?)
To: YoungKentuckyConservative
I am very upset about this proposal. I don't buy the "at least he is talking about the issue" kudos.
If this plan were law, the way I see it is every Mexican (or other countryman coming from south of the border) has two choices: he can go sign up for the Bush 3-year-plan, leave his family, and come over here and work legally; or he can take his whole clan and skip over the border illegally, getting all the services they now get. Hmmm? Which to choose, which to choose?
Unless the borders are shut, there is no use swinging an open door wider open.
103
posted on
01/09/2004 1:40:36 PM PST
by
Yaelle
To: Kay Soze
Raush's should read Rush's.
104
posted on
01/09/2004 1:41:03 PM PST
by
Kay Soze
(How will refocusing INS resources from the war on terror to millions of Mexicans make US safer?)
To: familyofman
Amazing how you find some nebulus issue to turn on Bush. Who has singlehanded(the dums sure do nothing)protected this country thru his policies. If he believes this is another way to protect us, then I support him. I find it hard to believe you ever supported GW. But I guess 911 is just a distant memory for you.
105
posted on
01/09/2004 2:19:39 PM PST
by
marty60
To: gatorbait
What all these "principled conservatives" should ask themselves is suppose their spouse, friends, relatives only agree with them 80% of the time -- do they trade them in for a new model, whos DISGREES with them 100% of the time?
Do the "principled conservatives" really prefer Dean as president, instead of George Bush?
To: zeugma
Run, Pat Run! If I have a choice I will vote for a true conservative for president. This shows that we need a REAL THIRD PARTY! Where are the Bull Moosers now that we need them! Bruce Wilis need to run or some other Real American.
Someone should challenge Bush in the Primary to let him see that all Republicans are not lock step behind him. Maybe--if this happened he wouls back away from this lamb open border idea.
107
posted on
01/09/2004 4:21:38 PM PST
by
Hollywoodghost
(Let he who would be free strike the first blow)
To: tiamat
It will not affect my opinion of Bush. I LIKE A PRESIDENT THAT LEADS NOT ONE THAT WAFFLES.
108
posted on
01/09/2004 4:22:46 PM PST
by
Big Horn
(A waist is a terrible thing to mind.)
To: YoungKentuckyConservative
How would anyone interpret this poll?
x% say it would affect their vote. Will some of those be convinced to vote for Bush when they wouldn't have otherwise?
y% say it would not affect their vote. Will they vote for Bush or his opponent?
109
posted on
01/09/2004 4:26:01 PM PST
by
gitmo
(Who is John Galt?)
To: Big Horn
110
posted on
01/09/2004 4:27:21 PM PST
by
tiamat
("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno World!")
To: FairOpinion
do they trade them in for a new model, whos DISGREES with them 100% of the time?
If they are true to their principles, sure. After all, if they cannot get perfection from what is claimed to be desired, then perfect ruination, with attendent weeping and gnashing of righteous teeth is a great way to live out the day.
111
posted on
01/09/2004 6:35:39 PM PST
by
gatorbait
(Yesterday, today and tomorrow......The United States Army)
To: YoungKentuckyConservative
The Prez has certainly opened up a dialog. It has prompted
me to write to my congress critters!
To: tiamat
We have 10's of Millions of people collecting welfare benefits, many are able bodied living right here in America. What would be wrong with forcing those people to fill those so called unwanted jobs? Welfare cannot be any more lucrative financially than making minimum wage, other than the lazy bums sit with free food while the hungry illegals come to work. Filling those so called unwanted jobs by welfare Americans closes the incentive for illegal immigrants to come here to seek work.
But forcing the welfare people to work would alienate a whole 2nd and 3rd generation lifestyle of voters who rally behind the Democrats entitlements twinkie. Think of the fear of the welfare lifestyle if benefits were rumored to be discontinued! Name a politician who would take the heat for such a proposal!
My solution to illegal immigration is to eliminate welfare and food stamps, and the resulting hungry people will seek work wherever. Americans will fill the jobs. Illegals will stay home.
To: YoungKentuckyConservative
Yep. I will vote Constitution Party. Apart from the tax cuts, just how different is the current admin from a Dem one? Pubs control the Executive and Legislative branches and the best we can do is Dem Lite and a disasterous immigration policy designed to appease internationalist corporate interests for cheap, docile labor and to pander to the "Hispanic vote"? F BushRove!
To: petercooper; Alissa
What do you consider to be an outragous salary?
Would you pick up trash for any amount of money or does a college education shield your consideration of such a job?
Maybe some would consider your salarys outragous! How much is a desk job worth in salary considering there is little physical exertion and the hands stay clean? Not saying you work desk jobs, just for comparative purposes. But should a pencil pusher be paid more than a garbage collector?
Pencil pushers seem to dislike Unions because it places their salary within an equal consideration of a Union worker. Yet any worker feels like his/her job is a significant contribution to America. Or is it a stigma that is might be possible for a garbage collector to buy a house next to a white collar worker and send their kids to the same school?
Maybe a good retirement program can offset a failing social Security program?
What is the cost of living in New York compared to say Kokomo?
The fear of the cost of food skyrocketing is more of a supply demand issue than a labor issue. If the crop needs to be harvested and help is short, wages will fall in line to attract workers. We still haven't seen the 10 dollar Big Mac yet, dispite warnings about raising fast food workers wages from minimum to 8 dollars an hour.
To: YoungKentuckyConservative
Voting for someone else in November isn't enough -- I want the insect out now. Thrasymachus has an excellent idea:
http://thrasymachus.typepad.com/thras/2004/01/impeach_bush.html And here's more Joe Guzzardi, just one among many of his I could post:
http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/texas_rangers.htm And be sure to check this out -- here's an example of the way terrorists are identified at U.S. air terminals according to the very strict procedural directives handed down from D.C. by the Bush Administration:
http://thrasymachus.typepad.com/thras/2004/01/orange_alert_at.html#comments Yeah, this guy Bush is a great terrorism fighter -- ordering guards to randomly frisk old white grandmas and the little white children traveling with them to show how unracist the government is, while letting swarthy twenty-and-thirty-something Arab-looking men traveling alone or in small groups get through unsearched. Yeah, the oh-so-Christian Bush has got a guaranteed spot in heaven for himself, for being so unracist! What a brilliant idea! He and Rove are frickin GENIUSES! Hey, why don't the Israelis adopt that tactic? Yeah -- just let all the guys who are dead-ringers for Mohammad Atta with that psychotic scowl on their face get through unsearched while the security guards are busy proving how unracist they are by detaining and frisking all the white ten-year-olds and strip-searching the young Jewish mothers or the aged Jewish grandmothers the ten-year-olds are traveling with! Yeah, that tactic'll REALLY GET ISRAEL THROUGH THIS IN ONE PIECE!
(... meantime, has anybody had just about enough of this contemptible Tranzi traitor to his country and back-stabber of his supporters, this pathetic unintelligent creep running what amounts to a third Clinton administration?...)
To: angelbaby1111
![](http://members.shaw.ca/victoriausa/SaberCrouch.jpg)
Bush won't care if he loses his base. He would love to win in 2004 but his priniciples and convictions come first. He is a Christian first and foremost and everything he does bears that in mind. He truly walks the walk unlike anyone I have ever seen. That's why some of his "compassionate Conservative" decisions anger so many on the left and right. For some reason, anything Christian makes those who are not nuts! I'm not preaching...just teaching.
You aren't teaching, either. There's nothing about "walking the walk" that spurs a good Christian President to fail to enforce our immigration laws in accordance with his Oath of Office, and then attempt to reward the lawbreakers with Amnesty. If your post is an accurate reflection of President Bush's internal monologue, it's just self-congratulatory sophistry.
|
117
posted on
01/10/2004 8:08:53 AM PST
by
Sabertooth
(Eighteen solutions better than any Amnesty - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1053318/posts)
To: deport
![](http://members.shaw.ca/victoriausa/SaberCrouch.jpg)
I guess then the 168 or so Judges that have been confirmed to the Federal Judiciary would be the same or better had they been appointed by the Democrats? Yep you really make sense.......
Since conservative judges are better than liberal judges, why does it make sense to risk more liberal judges by having President Bush sow division in the party over his desire to Amnesty millions of Illegals?
|
118
posted on
01/10/2004 8:12:19 AM PST
by
Sabertooth
(Eighteen solutions better than any Amnesty - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1053318/posts)
To: BlackbirdSST
scare mongeringIt amazes me how nonchalant these folks are with such a deadly serious accusation.
Food shortages! Starvation! Ten-dollar cabbages!
Where's the evidence our food supply will collapse?
There isn't any.
To: YoungKentuckyConservative
Let me tell you when *I* finally "had it" with conservative support of the Bush Amnesty Plan. When radio talk show hosts like Hugh Hewitt and Michael Medved verbally smirk at me with lines like, "well where else are you going to go?"
I'm not going ANYWHERE on election day this November. I'm staying home.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-138 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson