Candidates on the Issues: Immigration

Newsday ^ | Jan. 18, 2004 | AP

[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"

[FairOpinion]

I kept it to snippets to keep within the excerpts guidelines.

What my question to the FR posters voicing their strong opposition to Bush, to the extent of not wanting to vote for him: Which of the above Dems do you prefer?

In November Bush or one of the above Dems WILL be US President for the next 4 years.

Do you prefer Bush's stand on terrorism, national defense, foreign policy, economy (taxcuts), immigration, or do you prefer the Dems' stand on those issues?

It's going to be either Bush or one of the Dems -- you can read the Dems stand on the issues of illegal immigration in the above article -- recommend reading the entire article, so you get the full impact.

Who do you think will be better for the country overall -- Bush or one of them?

[FairOpinion]

PING

You may want to ping your list for information on where ALL candidates stand on immigration.

[FairOpinion]

Ping -- trying to enlighten some around here with some facts...

[Missouri]

Ping.

[mystery-ak]

I see the key word here is *earned*...hmmmmm!

[WOSG]

Me: The Democrats are uniformly bad, wanting to end American power, soveriengty and destroy our borders and culture. Amnesty is a surrender to the problem not a solution of it. President Bush's immigration proposal, while not a horrible as the Democrats, is at best a non-solution and could possibly make things worse without improved immigration law enforcement.

Better solutions than all the Democrats and Bush have proposed can be found here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1059957/posts

[Faith]

You raise an excellent question. Thanks for the post.

[CWOJackson]

"Who do you think will be better for the country overall -- Bush or one of them?"

Oh boy...

[evaporation-plus]

Who do you think will be better for the country overall -- Bush or one of them?

It might be easier for a republican congress to say NO to a democratic president.....

[takenoprisoner]

"Who do you think will be better for the country overall -- Bush or one of them?"

same difference

[FairOpinion]

"It might be easier for a republican congress to say NO to a democratic president....."

===

This is a totally ridiculous argument.

And what happens when the Senate reverts to the Democrats too?

[McGavin999]

It might be easier for a republican congress to say NO to a democratic president.....

What on earth makes you think it's going to be a republican congress? If everyone sits out, that may well end too.

[chicagolady]

I can't believe what I am reading, I am healthy enough to know it is ok to disagree and voice it.
There is nothing wrong with strongly disagreeing.

[jveritas]

Great article. Please post it again tomorrow so it will get some more traction. Some people on FR went mad about the President immigration plan that they forgot all the other great things he is doing on the war on terror, tax cuts, late term abortion, etc.... Some of our friends on FR need to be reminded that President Bush is far much better that any Democrat running for the White House. We must have President Bush re-elected during the critical moment our history. Bush is the President we must have to lead us in the war on terror. The alternative Democrat will be just a disaster for our nation.

[FairOpinion]

"There is nothing wrong with strongly disagreeing. "

==

Of course not.

But when people say they will not vote for Bush because of this issue, they need to be aware, what the consequences of those actions are: electing one of the Dems, who is much worse on the immigration issue than Bush, AND also stands for everything conservatives are against.

We have a choice: support Bush, while we may not agree with everything he does, or attack Bush, to the delight of the Dems, and end up with one of the Dems who are an actual danger to this country.

There are NO third choices.

Bush or one of the Dems, and now you can all see how the Dems stand on immigration.

[Go Gordon]

is at best a non-solution and could possibly make things worse without improved immigration law enforcement.

Bush has almost 11 months til the election. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that if the immigration policy gets brought to fruition, Bush will have the cover to THEN enforce the borders.

[jveritas]

Agreed. I just cannot believe that some people on FR are gone so mad about the President immigration plan that they are coming up with these silly arguments that it is better to have a Democrat in the White House because the GOP congress will say NO to him. Did those people forget so early how angry they were when Clinton was a President!!!! Oh! man, I just cannot believe what I am reading lately on FR.

[Missouri]

trying to enlighten some around here with some facts...

I for one have know for a long time how the rats stand on amnesty. They want to give them amnesty, citizenship, the right to vote, and the right to organize (join unions). They will vote heavily in the democrats favor. This will dilute the conservative vote.

Thats one reason I think that they should be deported when found. GWB's proposal will make illegals more comfortable here and will feel no pressure to leave. I for one think that this proposal will go nowhere in the House of Representitives.

I also remember during the 2000 debates with Gore, he stated that he was for some kind of legalize status for some illegals. So this doesn't surprise me. Gores position was much more extreme. I will admit after 9-11 I was hoping that GWB would change his mind but I guess not.

I for one have not called for Georges head on a plate and will probably vote for him. I figure by election day we all will be sick to our stomachs with the democratic canidate. I have wrote both my Republican Senators telling them of my opposition to this proposal and encourage them to vote against this if it comes to a vote.

[janetgreen]

With Bush's liberal policies, I cannot bring myself to vote for him again. He's no conservative. I'll write in Tom Tancredo, the only man in the House of Representatives who dares to speak up against this insane proposal. He's the only one who is representing me, and I don't live in his home state of Colorado.

[Ahban]

Who would be best for the country?

This guy....

http://www.peroutka2004.com/home.html

or Tom Tancredo