Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush Gives Country Away
WND.com | 01-15-03 | Farah, Joseph

Posted on 01/15/2004 9:49:14 AM PST by Theodore R.

Bush gives country away

Posted: January 15, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

President Bush's plan to legalize 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens – maybe considerably more – is one of the most irresponsible, dangerous, reckless proposals to come out of Washington in my lifetime.

And that's saying a lot.

In my lifetime, I have witnessed:

wage-and-price controls imposed by Richard Nixon;

the greatest expansion of unconstitutional, immoral wealth-transfer programs in the history of our country;

the use of the Internal Revenue Service by President Clinton to harass and intimidate political adversaries;

the sacrifice of more than 50,000 U.S. servicemen in a war they would not be allowed to win;

the shredding of the Constitution in a thousand ways to bring us to the point at which politicians no longer even question the limits of the federal government;

the transfer by President Clinton of sensitive technology with military applications to a budding superpower for campaign cash;

the demoralization and emasculation of the country under President Carter;

I watched all this and more in nearly a half-century of life. But, honestly, President Bush's proposal to legalize untold millions of illegal aliens is potentially worse than any of these blunders, any of these mistakes, any of these abuses.

Why?

First, because it is immoral. Bush claims this is the "compassionate" thing to do. But he is misusing the term "compassion" the same way do those who would most like to unseat him from power. There is nothing compassionate about inflicting pain on others, in hurting the country, while accepting none of the responsibility, nor pain, nor sacrifice yourself. This move will not materially affect George W. Bush's life. But it will impact those competing for jobs at the lower end of the economic ladder. It will impact those who live in crime-plagued areas of the country and who don't have Secret Service protection. It will impact those who chose to obey the laws rather than flout them as their first act in America.

Second, it is unconstitutional. The federal government has few and limited areas of responsibility in our republican system of government. Among those clearly defined areas are the defense of the nation and the defense of our borders. This act is a reprehensible betrayal of the president's oath of office to uphold the law and execute it.

Third, it is bad policy. Even the simple act of proposing this notion encourages more illegal immigration into our country. More foreigners will want to get in on the action. It sends a horrible signal that America doesn't really believe in enforcing its laws. It promotes chaos at our borders and crime in our streets.

Fourth, it risks national security. Presumably, there was a reason this president placed the Immigration and Naturalization Service under the Department of Homeland Defense. The American people assume it was because he finally recognized that out-of-control immigration is a real threat – especially at a time when terrorists are trying desperately to kill and maim as many of us as possible.

It's not strong enough to call Bush's proposal "irresponsible." It is borderline seditious. And there is a widespread perception he is making this move because he believes there is personal political gain in it.

That is hardly "compassion," Mr. President. That is the worst kind of cynicism. That is the worst kind of selfishness. That is the worst kind of example a leader could set for the nation.

Shame on Bush. Shame on his party for standing by quietly as he sets out to destroy the fabric of our nation. Shame on the opposition for suggesting his move doesn't go far enough. Shame on all Americans who lie down and accept this outrage from Washington.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: aliens; amen; carter; clinton; compassion; compassionless; deathofmiddleclass; farah; ghwb; goodbyeconstitution; hellonewworldorder; ilegalaliens; immigrantlist; immigration; nixon; sedition; shame
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 261 next last
To: Carry_Okie
"...and if elected, I will not run. ;-)"

LOL

161 posted on 01/15/2004 2:58:22 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Actually the rumor that night was that Reagan's running mate was going to be Gerald Ford.

I don't remember a lot of the particulars, just that it looked like a riot was about to break out on the convention floor. :)

Of course I don't remember what I watched on TV yesterday either.

162 posted on 01/15/2004 2:59:01 PM PST by itsahoot (The lesser of two evils, is evil still...Alan Keyes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: CMAC51
Bush also apologized because our immigration laws were not "humane." If you think this is all part of a clever Bush scheme to crack down on illegal immigration by saying he's not going to crack down on illegal immigration, I'd be interested in hearing you set forth your speculation. But I'm inclined to take Bush at his word: he thinks illegal aliens are wonderful, he wants to give them legal status, and he has no intention of enforcing those inhumane immigration laws.

It's not as if Bush has a record of being an immigration hard liner. He was pushing for an amnesty before 9/11, during the campaing he said "family values don't stop at the Rio Grande," and he has a history of campaigning to Americans in a foreign language. (Just imagine what Teddy Roosevelt would have said about that stunt).

163 posted on 01/15/2004 3:01:20 PM PST by Thorin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Re: Reagans Amnesty. Don't forget to note that the vice- president for Reagan was, at that time, George Bush Sr. He may have had something to do with the amnesty. He was the one who I heard first mention the New World Order, and the Thousand Points of Light. It wasn't Reagan who said those words.
164 posted on 01/15/2004 3:03:24 PM PST by Jennikins (It matters not what we want, as we are being ruled, not governed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dane
Dane writes
Tell me how you are going to deport 8 million people?

Weren't nearly _one_ million illegals deported when Eisenhower terminated the "bracero" program years ago?

The nation was only half the size it is today, so deporting one million then would be the equivalent of expelling 2 million today.

If Eisenhower (and America) could show one million "the door", we can do that to as many as are here now. It is a question of national will and determination, not one of numbers.

Unfortunately, the will to do so isn't there. Immigration "reform" will indeed pass, legalization of the illegal will occur, and 20 years from now, there will be 30-40 _million_ illegals in the country, at least.

They are either going back, or they're staying. If they stay, they will be legalized, one way or another (even through the birth of children here, if it takes that long). And if they stay, more will come.

Is it your wish that not even an _attempt_ be made at expelling the illegals?

Cheers!
- John

165 posted on 01/15/2004 3:03:47 PM PST by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: WayneM
>>> You must not read much while here. The method has been posted clearly and frequently. It can be condensed down to one point that goes something like this...

1) Enforce existing laws and pass new laws to make it plain to potential employers that if you hire an illegal, you are in grave danger of losing your business, your wealth, and your freedom.

It's that simple. If illegals are unable to find work, they will go home. <<<

Please explain to us how you propose to do this since efforts along this line in the past were blocked by the judiciary. First the ability of the employer to verify legal status was weakened. Then the ability to hold the employer accountable was weakened because, "after all, how was he to know the worker was illegal?" It all happened in the courts.

All the laws you can think of don't mean a thing if the judiciary refuses to enforce them. Your proposal is basically one that has been tried and failed in the past.

166 posted on 01/15/2004 3:06:51 PM PST by CMAC51
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: RebelBanker
My point was not the dollar cost of deportations, it was what it would look like. The images of soldiers (or even just regular police) rounding men, women and children up and putting them in trucks or trains to be deported would be political suicide for whoever was in charge.

That does not need to be done. Just enforce the current laws and stop all welfare for illegals and they will leave on their own accord.

167 posted on 01/15/2004 3:06:52 PM PST by Marine Inspector (TANCREDO 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: CMAC51
"And where were you when these approaches were tried in the past and negated by the judiciary? Were you sleeping when California voted resoundingly to deny services to illegal aliens and the judiciary stopped it? Were you day dreaming when the judiciary prevented schools from establishing whether students where legal residents or not?"

You ask where was I, and if I was I daydreaming?

If you must know, I was frolicking in the state of New Jersey where, yes -- I was daydreaming. Daydreaming about getting on my horse and having "my little friend" (insert voice of Al Pacino's 'Scarface') pay a visit to various over-activist Califoria courts and traitorous liberal judges over the usurping of the Peoples' authority. Reality is another matter...

OTOH, perhaps a certain GOP President might and his U.S. Attorney General may have a bit more pursuasive clout after the proper judicial appointments are made (yawn, if ever), and enforcement of the law upheld...

168 posted on 01/15/2004 3:12:34 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: RebelBanker
Rebel Banker (Deo Vindice) writes:
My question is, how do we convince them that is in their best interest to stay home in their third-world rathole rather than come to the greatest country on Earth?

I originally posted this to FR on December 26, 2003:

As off-the-wall as it may sound, I believe the ONLY way for the United States to halt the "Mexican invasion" is to ASSIMILATE Mexico through conquest and partition it into several addition states of the Union. Yes, I am advocating an outright war of oocupation and conquest against Mexico.

Once the next war with Mexico has been won, the United States will have become -- at least temporarily -- a bilingual nation, but at the same time, we can equalize the economic imbalance that currently exists in the Northern Hemisphere and is pushing the poor of Mexico/Central America in our direction.

Conquering Mexico will also repair some of the damage done by NAFTA, by creating a minimum wage in Mexico and by forcing businessness there to operate on an equal footing with those north of the border (and that includes Canada, too). Of course, Mexicans will become entitled to Social Security benefits, but wasn't the Bush administration ready to pay them to Mexico _anyway_? Might as well make them contributors as well as payees.

I believe that Mexico could be invaded and conquered in a matter of days, with little bloodshed. Mexican soldiers would throw down their arms so fast it would make the French look courageous. Their government is so corrupt that a majority of Mexicans would probably _welcome_ its overthrow by the United States. I wonder -- if a poll could be taken today posing to Mexicans the question of unification with America -- what the true reponse of Mexicans might be?

Ultimately, the question becomes, do we let Mexico conquer us demographically through unopposed immigration, or do we pre-empt such action by assimilating them first?

Like the ongoing war between the West and Islam, one side must ultimately win over the other. Which side do YOU wish to emerge victorious?

Cheers!
- John

169 posted on 01/15/2004 3:21:48 PM PST by Fishrrman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: RebelBanker
"...think about what it would take to round up and deport 8 to 12 million people"

You start by penalizing the employers of these illegals and thereby cut off the jobs that entice these folks to break our laws and invade our Country. As the jobs dry up, the illegals will make their way back to their homelands, where they can petition for citizenship like all the other folks who yearn to live in America!!

FReegards...MUD

170 posted on 01/15/2004 3:29:07 PM PST by Mudboy Slim (RE-IMPEACH Osama bil Clinton!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: F16Fighter
"I hadn't figured you would surrender so easily, Poob."

That's just it F16Fighter, some have all the excuses they need to quit before they even start.
Fact is, we made the (now voluntary) Employee Verification system mandatory, most would head home on their own. Just a few token round-ups to show we mean it, would send more packing.

We don't have to undertake any big effort, just show we have the will and are serious.

171 posted on 01/15/2004 3:47:15 PM PST by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
George W Bush sometimes i wonder if my fellow freepers actually understand why some of these things hes done and said are understood

Why would our President who is to uphold and defend the Constitution by his solemn oath tell America that ISLAM is a religion of peace ?

Why? Because [IMHO] this country the land of the free and home of the brave the melting pot of world is also that melting pot for muslims from every stretch of the world to come out as president and say that Islam is evil would put every muslim at odds with every other american who dont believe in islam it would start an internal struggle and eventually a civil war within our borders !

Why would he give a so called worker status to mexico ? for the very same reason 12 million mexicans on this side of the border and countless other millions on the other side depend on the American money they send home [ granted these monies are sometimes ill gotten like social security not worked for and earned or forms of welfare not rightly deserved but still the same its American currency] it feeds their economy !

Now putting troops on the border is a good idea to check those coming across to work but putting them their to cut off the flow is a bad idea [IMHO] and heres why .

Mexico to most people is still in many places a third world country under a socialist rule they have no economy to speak of none that would sustain their millions of people so they come to America to work and feed their masses back home if we cut off the flow of workers from mexico we would literally starve and ruin millions of families granted not all are of the nature of working for family but i would think most are ! we would essentially start a war with a border country what do you think starving people with hungry children would do for food they would fight for it to the death .

I think GWB has good intentions but there needs to be a better plan of action than just this worker program .

My idea would be to annex mexico although i don't think they would agree to it but its just my idea !

Flame away fellow freepers

172 posted on 01/15/2004 3:52:56 PM PST by ATOMIC_PUNK (Mars make economical sense at a 7 to 1 return on investment + creature benefits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
And yet it is even worse than anything the writer mentions. For it is in the continuity of its ethnicity; its honored lines of descent, with each generation honoring the fundamental principles and values of the society, that a nation lives, and finds the strength to resist the connivances of the unprincipled, the plotters, the demagogues, etc., who are always ready to exploit discontent.

It is in the pride mainstream Americans take in their history; their founding fathers; the Constitution, which reflects the unique values of their history and founding fathers, etc.; that enables the decent to rally against the wiles of the demagogues, playing on discontent, seeking to buy support with special interest legislation. Without that sense of heritage, of family heritage, the battle is over. The Clintons--and damn the new Clinton, Karl Rove--will run roughshod over the debris of the American Republic--once they achieve true "multi-culturalism."

The reality is that 10,000,000 Mexicans, are 10,000,000 people with no interest in the legacy of Washington and Jefferson, Adams and Madison--and certainly not of a Jeffersonian named Sam Houston, down in Texas. The 10,000,000 Mexicans might be the brightest, most hard working people on the face of the earth (for the sake of argument). Their heritage is one that sees itself as having been victimized by ours. Only a moron or someone truly despicable would suppose that we would not pay a terrible price, if we allow our politicians for imagined benefit of the moment, to seriously shift the ethnicity of America in this manner.

No it is not "politically correct." And why is that so? Because the whole "politically correct" syndrome has been concocted by the Left to prevent a reassertion of American national values; values which are totally inconsistent with Socialism; with World Government; with any and all of the prime objectives of the modern Left.

The time for pussy-footing around these issues has to stop, or we are going to lose the war. It is that simple. Once the percentage of those who do not feel a part of the American tradition that flows from those settler peoples who created the traditional America reaches a critical level, you will really see the politicians move Left. And we will be powerless to stop them, short of another Revolution.

For a sane and patriotic immigration policy, see Immigration & The American Future.

William Flax

173 posted on 01/15/2004 4:29:40 PM PST by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
I should not have cursed Rove. He is indeed a Republican Clinton, but profanity really does not belong in a serious discussion.
174 posted on 01/15/2004 4:53:20 PM PST by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Just so we don't stray off the real reason all this immigration situation is creating, remember the porosity of our Border is important but the true focus is those who hire illegal Aliens in the first place. Commonsense will tell you that the problem is those companies who make jobs so attractive to the Aliens in the first place. Shut those companies down and the jobs that are aligned with them and the problem will take of itself. Those who have crossed over and continue to do so must be Fingerprinted when captured and a database established so we know who and how many time they have been deported in the past. Good records are an invaluable tool in reducing the illegal crossings. When you take away the reason they come(JOBS) then you are addressing the "PROBLEM" not the "SYMPTOM" the Aliens represent. Otherwise you are like a dog chasing his tail.
175 posted on 01/15/2004 5:08:04 PM PST by winker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Bush's proposal is "compassionate" to whom? Certainly NOT the people who elected him or the people Bush is supposed to be serving. WE WERE DUPED AND WE ARE ABSOLUTELY AT THE MERCY OF A PRESIDENT THAT CARES NOT WHAT THE PEOPLE THINK NOR WHAT IS BEST FOR THIS COUNTRY..!!
176 posted on 01/15/2004 5:16:11 PM PST by Zipporah (Write inTancredo in 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan
..Why just Rove?
177 posted on 01/15/2004 5:17:42 PM PST by Zipporah (Write inTancredo in 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Texas_Dawg
Not funny at all - have you noted how well these home schoolers are doing when pitted against the Federal School educated? Might want to rethink your position.
178 posted on 01/15/2004 5:25:11 PM PST by Memother
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
A FReeper's Guide To Immigration Reform

"What remains to be seen is if this country has the capacity to accommodate, and assimilate, an unending wave of mass immigration ¯ because failure to do so will result in a balkanized, fragmented, strife-torn and dysfunctional America."

Federation for American Immigration Reform - FAIR

~ Take the FReeper Immigration Reform Poll ~

179 posted on 01/15/2004 5:29:14 PM PST by Happy2BMe (Liberty does not tolerate lawlessness and a borderless nation will not prevail.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kwilliams
Why don't you write about paint-balling the police station or how you egged your teacher's house or how you and your friends stole some beer and went to the lake with your girlfriends or something? That would be interesting. And I wouldn't be so worried about you then. Hey, I'm just looking out for you, Big K.
180 posted on 01/15/2004 5:39:04 PM PST by Texas_Dawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 261 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson