Skip to comments.
Candidates on the Issues: Immigration
Newsday ^
| Jan. 18, 2004
| AP
Posted on 01/18/2004 7:29:31 PM PST by FairOpinion
Clark:" ensure that undocumented workers have a way to eventually earn their citizenship."
Dean: "We need earned legalization for undocumented immigrants"
Edwards:"...so there is a clear road map to legalization and citizenship for undocumented immigrants"
Gephardt: "My Earned Legalization and Family Unification Act of 2002"...
Kerry: "I support an earned legalization proposal"
Lieberman: "I will create a new one-time earned legalization status...create a work visa program"
(Excerpt) Read more at newsday.com ...
TOPICS: Front Page News
KEYWORDS: 2004; aliens; guest; illegal; immigrants; immigration; issues; peroutka2004; visa; workers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 301-307 next last
To: kingu
The key word is " intelligent ". Another is "debate".
Nothing will "aid " this discussion with people who refuse to see reality.
To: kingu
Just trying to find out if Bush has committed a capital crime. Now as to me and old Vic we are the bestest of buddies
To: MissAmericanPie
"I did catch onto Bush fast "
==
I see -- I guess you would have preferred Gore.
Comment #184 Removed by Moderator
To: nopardons
Today this is true. But don't forget, the GOP was once a "fringe third party" that split from the Whigs because they wanted to fight the Democrats on the abolition of slavery.
And right now we are seeing the Democrats splinter so badly they will either go the way of the Whigs or formulate around the far left and absorb the Greens, Socialists, Commies, etc. if the so-called "centrist" from the DLC can't stop it. Which is Hillary and Bill's plan for 2008. Let the Dems move too far to the left and then ride in again on the white horse.
185
posted on
01/19/2004 1:20:52 AM PST
by
Fledermaus
(I hope the State of the Union address calls for less spending and more control over our money!)
To: nopardons; The_Eaglet
".. but reality is what I have said it is." Nopardons has spoken, it must be so.
Rod Sterling - MOVE OVER!
186
posted on
01/19/2004 1:21:50 AM PST
by
Happy2BMe
(Liberty does not tolerate lawlessness and a borderless nation will not prevail.)
To: Happy2BMe
Or does that count? . Well does it carry the death penalty?
To: Fledermaus
That'll be a hoot! Go Al baby, GO! LOL
To: Happy2BMe
You proclaim Reagan was the last conservative President. He gave REAL amnesty and promised enforcement and didn't deliver.
So I guess he too should be considered a criminal ala GW, eh?
Oh, and Reagan RAISED the Social Security taxes, gas taxes and the alternative minimum tax extension. As well as the Earned Income Tax Credit - one of the biggest scams in the tax code that is so uncontrollable the IRS can't possibly check if everyone on it is eligible.
So don'tbe so quick to judge.
189
posted on
01/19/2004 1:25:19 AM PST
by
Fledermaus
(I hope the State of the Union address calls for less spending and more control over our money!)
To: Fledermaus
The GOP is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar removed from the Whigs, but yes, the Dems are in a great deal of troble.
To: nopardons
I know, I said that...they left the Whig party and were back then considered "fringe" and "a party going nowhere", etc.
I'll bet someone back then said, "a vote for the newly Republican party is a wasted vote and just like voting for a Democrat".
191
posted on
01/19/2004 1:27:50 AM PST
by
Fledermaus
(I hope the State of the Union address calls for less spending and more control over our money!)
To: nopardons
There are quite a few other candidates for the Republican nomination in addition to whoever the Libertarians nominate.
I take it that you are confident that the Republican Party will nominate an incumbent who outspent the previous administrations (and on a deficit, aty that), including that of Bill Clinton. If such is a case, neither the party nor the nominee are worthy of the support of conservatives. Another option must be presented and promoted that rejects socialistic expansion and supports the Constitution's limits on federal activity.
192
posted on
01/19/2004 1:28:10 AM PST
by
The_Eaglet
(Michael Peroutka for President)
To: Happy2BMe
See................you don't know the real from the delusion, after all.
Rod Serling is dead, are you implying that I should be too ? Or, if you're trying to interject a " TWILIGHT ZONE " something or other, first look to your own postings.
To: Texasforever; MissAmericanPie
"Well does it carry the death penalty?" Bush guilty of a captial crime? Did he commit a crime?
News to me.
However, he has slipped and tripped and skinned his knees all over illegal immgration reform (the illegals are now legal thing).
Nope. Nothing capital here. Political suicide perhaps.
194
posted on
01/19/2004 1:30:19 AM PST
by
Happy2BMe
(Liberty does not tolerate lawlessness and a borderless nation will not prevail.)
To: nopardons
Sterling . . it's Rod Sterling.
195
posted on
01/19/2004 1:30:56 AM PST
by
Happy2BMe
(Liberty does not tolerate lawlessness and a borderless nation will not prevail.)
To: Fledermaus
But it only took tyhe GOP a very few election cycles to oust the Whigs completely. The LP's been around many dedcades, the RP went bust, the CP is sooooooooooo far off the radar, almost nol one even knows it exists.
To: Texasforever
If you had not noticed, treason is no longer a capital offense.
To: FairOpinion
That's what we've been saying exactly -- thank you for confirming for us that those who resort to personal attacks, -- whom you carefully omitted from your admonishment, curiously enough -- are proving to be less than intelligent.
I admonished you three not because you were the only three doing it (hell, I've done it more times that I care to remember) but because you have great points that stand up well on their own without needing to drop the level of debate. ('course, then you go with the zinger about them being less than intelligent... *bap!*)
Same goes for those who can't seem to discuss the immigration issue without calling Bush a traitor and so on.
Is Bush a traitor? No, though others are welcome to their opinion. If that distresses you, then ignore that line of argument, because they'll continue to use it as a club to divert the issue.
Anyway, just my point of view, and feel free to ignore it.
198
posted on
01/19/2004 1:33:07 AM PST
by
kingu
(Remember: Politicians and members of the press are going to read what you write today.)
To: Happy2BMe
Somehow I missed the ratification on that.
199
posted on
01/19/2004 1:35:13 AM PST
by
The_Eaglet
(Michael Peroutka for President)
To: Fledermaus
The only differences between the Gipper and GW is what GW has not done that Reagan did. You mentioned the Amnesty and raising taxes, but Bush has also never signed an anti-gun bill Reagan did that twice and then lobbied for the Brady bill. Bush has never pulled troops out of harms way when casualties were taken, Reagan did. Bush has never just paid lip service to the abortion issue that is all Regan gave. Bush has never held up FDR as his role model and Reagan did plus voted for him 4 times. In all other respects, GW has based his entire governing model on the gippers and is actually following that model closer that Reagan did.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180, 181-200, 201-220 ... 301-307 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